Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled safeguarding concerns after her child was removed from her care. There is not sufficient remaining injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to properly safeguard her child after she was removed from her care.
2. Miss X wants her child to return to her care.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
5. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. After safeguarding concerns were raised about Miss X’s child, the Council applied for an Interim Care Order and the Court decided that Miss X’s child should not return home.
9. Miss X complained to the Council. The Council investigated Miss X’s complaint and held a Mediation Meeting with Miss X.
10. Miss X escalated her complaint to Stage 2. The Council appointed an Investigating Officer and an Independent Person and investigated Miss X’s complaint at Stage 2 of the statutory children’s complaints procedure.
11. At Stage 2 Miss X raised 21 complaints. The Investigating Officer did not investigate three complaints because these issues had already been considered during court proceedings. Two complaints relating to Education were not considered because these needed to be investigated separately. The Investigating Officer partially upheld three complaints. The Council’s Adjudicating Officer accepted the Investigating Officers’ findings in full.
12. Miss X asked for a Stage 3 Review Panel. The Panel found the investigation at Stage 2 was fairly and thoroughly carried out, and the findings were consistent with the available information.
13. There were delays at all stages of the statutory complaints process. However, the Council apologised for the delays and paid £50 to Miss X. This is a suitable remedy in line with our guidance.
14. The Council undertook a fair and thorough investigation of Miss X’s complaints as per the statutory children’s complaints procedure. As there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, I cannot question the outcome. There is not sufficient remaining injustice to warrant an investigation. It is understandable that Miss X wants her child to return home, but this is a matter for the Court to decide.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled safeguarding concerns after her child was removed from her care. There is not sufficient remaining injustice to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman