Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about contact with her children or the Council’s assessment of this because this is before a Court. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision to have a Child Protection Plan. And we are unlikely to significantly add to the Council’s replies to Miss X’s complaint about communication issues.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the way the Council’s children services’ team has dealt with her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
3. We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been mentioned as part of the legal proceedings regarding a closely related matter. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))
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: there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (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 Miss X which includes the Council’s reply to her.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X says the Council’s children services team has bullied her and treated her badly. She complained to the Council in June 2025 about an assessment report, the Council’s decision to have a child protection plan and communication issues. It replied in June and August. It explained the Council had decided to adopt a child protection plan because a multi agency meeting, (a Child Protection Conference) had recommended one. The Council apologised for communication issues.
8. Miss X complained to us in September 2025. Since then she has added to her complaint, including issues with contact with her children. She says the Council removed her children from her care in October 2025 following the Court’s issue of an Interim Care Order (ICO). She has also shared her application to the Court for contact issues to be resolved.

Analysis

9. We cannot investigate issues which a Court is considering. Here that includes the children’s care arrangements including where they live and the contact they have with parents.
10. We also cannot investigate any Council assessments or reports used in those court proceedings.
11. The CPC plays an advisory role. But the final decision, for example whether to place a child on a Child Protection Plan (CPP) or to discontinue a CPP, is the responsibility of the Council. We would generally consider it appropriate for a council to follow the recommendations of the CPC unless there was good reason not to. Given the Council went on to obtain an ICO, we are unlikely to criticise the Council’s decision in June 2025 to have a CPP.
12. We are unlikely to be able to significantly add to the Council’s reply about communication issues in June 2025. Any issues since then will need to be subject of a new complaint from Miss X to the Council before we could consider them.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about contact with her children or the Council’s assessment of this because this is before a Court. We are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision to have a CPP. And we are unlikely to significantly add to the Council’s replies to Miss X’s complaint about communication issues.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman