Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Miss X’s family. Social Work England and the Information Commissioner’s Office are better placed to consider some of Miss X’s concerns about a social worker and data handling. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the content of a court report because the issues have likely been considered by a court. For the remainder of Miss X’s complaint, the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement and investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s involvement with her family, specifically that:

• a social worker acted unprofessionally, including making inappropriate remarks;
• a social worker provided inaccurate information to a third party for a court report; and
• its communication was poor and it failed to conduct visits to her and her child

2. Miss X said the matter has caused a negative impact to her mental health.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

4. 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))
5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
6. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Social worker’s actions

9. Miss X said a social worker involved with her family acted unprofessionally.
10. Social Work England (SWE) is the regulator of social workers in England and was set up to consider concerns about social workers’ professional practice. It is therefore reasonable to expect Miss X to raise her concerns with SWE because it is better placed to consider these concerns.
11. Miss X also complained a social worker made inappropriate comments about her partner. However, I do not consider this caused Miss X a significant personal injustice. Therefore, we will not investigate this matter.
12. In any case, in its complaint response the Council told Miss X if she had evidence of this it would consider it. It is open to Miss X to provide any evidence to the Council to allow it to consider the information.

Information for a court report & right to rectification

13. Miss X said the Council provided incorrect information to a third party to include in a court report.
14. It is likely the content of the report was considered by the court, and Miss X had the opportunity to challenge its content during proceedings. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to have raised any discrepancies during the court process. For this reason, we will not investigate this complaint.
15. Miss X also asked the Council to amend its records due to what she believed were inaccuracies.
16. Miss X has the right to ask for her records to be ‘rectified’. This means any factual inaccuracies are corrected. If the Council refuses to do so, she can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Parliament set up the ICO to consider data protection disputes which includes ‘right to rectification’ disputes. The ICO is better placed than the Ombudsman to consider if the Council should change its records, particularly because there are complex exemptions for child protection case files. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Poor communication

17. Finally, Miss X said the Council’s communication was poor and that it had failed to contact her for weeks at a time.
18. In the Council’s complaint response, it said it had tried to contact Miss X to arrange visits but had been unsuccessful. The Council invited Miss X to contact a newly allocated social worker to arrange a visit and provided their contact details.
19. An investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything further, and therefore we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We will not investigate part of Miss X’s complaint because other agencies are better placed to consider it. We will not investigate some matters because the issues complained about likely formed part of court proceedings. We will not investigate the remainder because the tests in our assessment code are not met.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman