Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about safeguarding Mr F’s children because there is nothing we could add to the Council’s response by further investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms M complains the Council failed to safeguard her partner Mr F’s children when they lived with their mother. She complains about the Council’s response to one of the children’s allegations against another adult. She is unhappy with information provided by the Council to the Court during private proceedings.
2. The children now live with Ms M and Mr F.
3. Ms M complains that she and Mr F have carried the burden of keeping their children safe. She wants an apology, records changing and service improvements, particularly around handling disclosures from children.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council responded to Ms M and Mr F’s complaint at both stages of its complaints procedure.
9. The Council did not uphold Ms M and Mr F’s complaints, although it acknowledged it got a date wrong in a letter to the Court when Ms M and Mr F took private family proceedings.
10. The Council explained that its initial involvement when the children lived with their mother was ‘early help’ which ended when the mother withdrew consent. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
11. One child made a disclosure to Mr F about another adult but did not make the disclosure to a social worker who visited from the Council. The Council conducted a child protection enquiry, recommended supervised contact with the other adult, but no further action was necessary as Mr F had removed the children. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
12. Ms M and Mr F then began private family proceedings. The Court asked the Council for information. The law prevents us considering complaints about court proceedings, including information provided by the Council to the Court.
13. The Council’s response is thorough and fair. There is nothing we could add by further investigation. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and without evidence of fault causing injustice, we cannot recommend the actions Ms M wants. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms M’s complaint because there is nothing we could add by further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman