Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s child protection proceedings and the conduct of a Social Worker. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Chair of a Child Protection Conference was not independent or impartial. He said the outcome of the Conference was predetermined, that information presented was false and his views were not heard.
2. Mr X also said a Social Worker made an unsubstantiated allegation he assaulted another professional. He said the Social Worker was abrupt and interrupted him. He wants and apology and an independent investigation into the Social Worker’s conduct.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X said that a Senior Social Worker was an unsuitable Chair for a Child Protection Conference (CPC). The Council confirmed in its complaint response the Senior Social Worker was qualified to Chair a CPC and they had no previous involvement with Mr X’s family.
8. Mr X said the outcome of the CPC was predetermined because the Chair said they would put Mr X’s children on a Child Protection Plan, regardless of the outcome. We would generally consider it appropriate for a Council to follow the recommendations of the CPC, unless there was good reason not to. In its complaint response the Council said it reviewed the Conference recording and was satisfied that each professional made their own decision, which was unanimous, and to put in place a child protection plan. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
9. Mr X said his Social Worker falsely said he assaulted a professional. He also complained about the conduct of his Social Worker. The Social Worker clarified her statement and updated the records to reflect there were no allegations of assault against Mr X. The Social Worker apologised for any abruptness. These actions are appropriate and further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome. If Mr X wants to complain about the Social Workers fitness to practice, this is a matter for Social Work England.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman