Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council exercised its child protection duties. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, for some parts of the complaint other bodies are better placed to consider them, and we cannot achieve the outcomes that Mrs X wants.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council started a child protection investigation based on inaccurate information, did not follow child protection procedures, social workers were rude and unprofessional, and records the Council holds are inaccurate.
2. Mrs X said that this caused trauma to her and her family and has affected her career.
3. Mrs X wants social workers to face disciplinary and criminal proceedings, receive financial compensation, and for the rectification of the records she considers inaccurate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X’s complaint has already been considered at all stages of the three-stage children’s statutory complaints process. This means that Mrs X’s complaint has already been subject to an independent investigation.
8. I have considered the documents from Mrs X’s complaint, and I note that:

• Each part of the complaint was considered and addressed by the Council.
• The investigator, at stage two, made extensive references to case records and relevant guidance.
• On the points of the complaint which were not upheld, the findings of the stage two investigator do not appear obviously unreasonable, given the evidence summarised in the report.
• The stage three panel report appears to reinforce that the quality of the stage two report was satisfactory.

9. For some parts of Mrs X’s complaint, the Council also appears to have taken steps to outline how its service will operate better in future. Any measures to improve its service are a matter for the Council to decide, not the Ombudsman.
10. Because of this, it is unlikely I would be able to add anything significant to what the Council has already said. If I were to reinvestigate the complaint, it is also unlikely that this would lead to a substantially different outcome for Mrs X.
11. The Ombudsman cannot investigate whether social workers are meeting their professional standards of conduct. Complaints of this nature should be referred to the social workers’ professional body, Social Work England.
12. The Council has considered Mrs X’s challenge to the accuracy of information it holds and told her its position.
13. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. In this case, the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider this part of Mrs X’s complaint.
14. We cannot achieve the outcomes that Mrs X seeks. As at paragraph 11, Social Work England is better placed to consider disciplinary action against social workers, and criminal prosecution is a matter for the police.
15. We also cannot award financial compensation for trauma. This is a matter for the courts.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, for some parts of the complaint other bodies are better placed to consider them, and we cannot achieve the outcomes that Mrs X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman