Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled his safeguarding concerns about his children. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council ignored safeguarding concerns relating to coercive and discriminatory behaviour despite two police reports and a Child Arrangements Order.
2. He also complains that the Council has failed to carry out a safeguarding assessment under the Children’s Act 1989.
3. Mr X said the Council has breached its duties under the Equality Act 2010 because it did not put reasonable adjustments in place despite his health problems.
4. He says his children have suffered from inconsistent contact with him which he says could have been prevented if the Council had carried out its duties.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
6. 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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
7. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Mr X complains that the Council has not carried out a safeguarding assessment.
11. The Council told Mr X that it has not identified any safeguarding concerns in relation to his children and therefore will not carry out a safeguarding assessment.
12. The Council says it has checked across its service and found no evidence of any safeguarding issues in relation to Mr X’s children. I have not seen enough evidence of fault to question the merits or outcome of the Council’s decision and actions.
13. The Council has advised Mr X to seek legal advice in relation to the Child Arrangements Order in place.
14. Mr X said that the Council breached its Equality Act duties because it has not put reasonable adjustments in place in response to his health concerns. However, we are not an appeal body, and if Mr X believes the Council has breached its equality duties, he can take the matter to court.
15. A court can decide whether the Council failed to meet its equality duties.
16. I also note that the Council has imposed contact restrictions on Mr X because of his frequency of communications to the Council. I have not found enough evidence of fault to question the merits of the Council’s decision because the information I have seen suggests it acted in line with its Managing Unreasonable and Unacceptable Behaviour Policy.
17. The policy says that the Council may restrict contact if a customer makes repeated or unreasonable contact over matters that have been resolved.
18. The Council explained that it was imposing the restriction because of the frequency of Mr X’s communications over matters that it had already resolved or responded to.
19. It also explained that it will review the restrictions after six months and during that time it will still respond to Mr X if he contacts them about a new issue. This is also in line with its Managing Unreasonable and Unacceptable Behaviour Policy.

Final decision

20. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating his safeguarding concerns or the Councils’ decision to impose contact restrictions. He can take the matter to court for the part of his complaint that relates to the Council’s Equality Act duties.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman