Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to Ms X’s safeguarding concern. This is because the person complaining is not an authorised representative of the person affected by the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to safeguard a child in her care. She said Social Workers were unprofessional and did not share necessary information with her.
2. Ms X complained the Council made misleading and defamatory comments about her. She said she had lost all confidence in the system. She wants the Council to acknowledge its failings in how it handled her safeguarding concerns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint

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

5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) 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.)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X complained the Council failed to act on her safeguarding concerns regarding a child who was temporarily in her care.
9. The Council said Ms X does not hold parental responsibility for the child. In its response to Ms X’s complaint, it said it could not share any information with her and explained its reasons.
10. The Council said it removed the child from Ms X’s care supported by the police following a safeguarding intervention initiated by the child’s family. It confirmed she was not authorised to receive information about the child and would not investigate the complaint further. The Council said no safeguarding concern had been identified by the Council that required Ms X’s involvement but provided her with the contact details to submit any further safeguarding concerns. We will not investigate this complaint because Ms X is not an authorised representative of the person affected by the Council’s actions.
11. Ms X says the Council referenced an assessment at her home that did not take place. In its complaint response the Council clarified it was referring to the safeguarding intervention at Ms X’s home initiated by the child’s family. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
12. Ms X complained that the Council’s response included a misleading and defamatory comment when it explained the police’s concern about her ability to look after a child. If Ms X is unhappy with this statement, she can raise a complaint directly with the police.
13. Ms X says that the Council shared her complaint with other agencies which was a data breach because it contained her address. If Ms X is unhappy with information shared by the Council and believes it has applied data protection legislation incorrectly, that would be matter for the ICO which is the proper authority for complaints about data breaches.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because the person complaining is not an authorised representative of the person affected by the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman