Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about information the Council has recorded about him and its involvement with his children. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement. We also cannot question the merits of the Council’s decisions and professional judgement where there does not appear to be evidence of procedural fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has mislabelled him as a primary perpetrator (of domestic abuse) in its records for his children. Mr X believes this is inaccurate as another Council department accepts he has been a victim of domestic abuse. Mr X believes the Council’s inaccurate labelling has led to his separation from his children. He believes the Council has ignored key evidence and failed to acknowledge his Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) diagnosis. He wants the Council to remove the primary perpetrator label from all its records and information shared with other agencies. He also wants the Council to apologise, provide further staff training and a financial remedy for the distress caused to him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s Children Social Care Team is involved with Mr X’s family following police referrals after attending reports of incidents of domestic abuse within Mr X’s family home. The Council’s Adult Social Team is also involved with Mr X as it is supporting him with his mental health and mobility needs.
7. The Council’s Children Social Care Team has considered Mr X’s complaints about the information recorded about him and its interaction since it became involved with his family. The Council’s stage one complaint response provides a detailed and thorough explanation of the rationale for recording the information it has about domestic abuse incidents that have occurred between Mr X and his ex-partner. The Council’s response also confirmed its records include that Mr X has also been the victim of domestic abuse by his ex-partner. The Council explained it had found no evidence of discrimination but invited Mr X to provide further information or evidence about this.
8. The information recorded about Mr X by the two Council teams involved demonstrates how the focus of each team is distinctly different. The Adult Social Care Team’s focus is on Mr X’s needs and supporting him, while the Children Social Care Team’s focus is on ensuring Mr X’s children are safeguarded and their wishes and feelings are central to this team’s work. This difference is not evidence of fault. Both Council Teams have recorded Mr X as a victim of domestic abuse.
9. We are not an appeals body. It is not our role to review the evidence available and reach a decision in place of the Council. Where Council Officers appear to have made decisions having considered all the evidence and reached a professional judgement, we cannot intervene.
10. Mr X’s inability to remain in his family home appears to be as a result of bail conditions imposed by the police, rather than any action by the Council. While those bail conditions have now been lifted, any issues Mr X continues to have about his contact with his children are matters for the court to consider.
11. Any arrangements about care and contact of children is a private matter between the people who have parental responsibility. Where those people cannot agree on those arrangements, only the court has the power to intervene and make decisions about what arrangements would be in the children’s best interests and on any matters of dispute.
12. We will not investigate this complaint because neither we nor the Council can make decisions about Mr X’s contact with his children. It would be reasonable for Mr X to take this matter to court.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s handling to question the merits of its decisions and investigate further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman