Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s contact with the Council during child protection enquiries. The Council has upheld most of Mr X’s complaint and has provided an appropriate remedy for his injustice. There are no wider public interest issues remaining to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about several aspects relating to his contact with the Council during child protection enquiries relating to his child (G). He said the Council:
1. Did not properly consult with him and communication was poor.
2. Did not take any action relating to his concerns about another child, (C).
3. Did not provide him with adequate support.
2. Mr X was unhappy the Council did not properly consider the impact on him during its complaint handling and wants the Council to ensure this does not happen again.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), 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. In late July 2025, the Council received a referral about Mr X’s child, G and it initiated child protection (CP) enquiries under section 47 of the Children Act 1989. Mr X was not immediately made aware of this and then had contact with the Council in late July and early August. Additionally, in September, Mr X met with a Council officer who provided additional information about the case closure.
7. Mr X then made a formal complaint to the Council. During the complaint procedures the Council upheld Mr X’s complaint about matters at a) and b). It responded by saying:
• It could have communicated better with him during the CP enquiries;
• it should have referred C to another Council earlier, and had now done so, and;
• it gave Mr X a summary of its actions during the complaint investigation.
8. The Council also agreed it would complete a child and family assessment and share this with Mr X. And it said he could send it any comments for it to include these in the Council’s case records.
9. Given the Council has upheld most of Mr X’s complaints and provided a suitable remedy for his injustice, as outlined in paragraphs seven and eight, I will not investigate. This is because I am satisfied I would not achieve a different outcome and the Council’s actions to resolve the complaint are appropriate.
10. In so far is it affects complaint c), Mr X was unhappy the Council did not provide him with support when he asked for it. The Council provided an explanation for how it had responded here, including signposting him to other agencies. It did not uphold his complaint. I will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint on its own, because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable in considering this in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council upheld most of the complaint and provided a suitable remedy for any injustice. There are no wider public interest issues remaining to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman