City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 021 790)
Category : Children's care services > Child protection
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 04 May 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council failed to safeguard her and her siblings. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
- Miss X says the Council failed to safeguard her and her siblings. She says it did not act properly on concerns she raised about her mother’s, Ms Y’s, mental health or food shortages at home. She also says it did not offer her appropriate support.
- Miss X says this has caused her ongoing trauma and anxiety, affecting her education and work. She wants the Council to acknowledge fault, pay compensation, and review its safeguarding procedures.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
- I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- The Council’s complaint response show it initially provided Early Help support to Miss X’s family to assist with Ms Y’s mental health and family relationships. When the Early Help worker identified safeguarding concerns, the Council completed a social work assessment. This led to safeguarding enquiries and an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC). Following the ICPC, the Council placed Miss X’s siblings on child protection plans. It also agreed a safety plan with Ms Y that included Miss X. This included ongoing support for Ms Y and guidance on what to do in an emergency. It kept the safety plan under review.
- Following the Council identifying safeguarding concerns, I am satisfied it undertook the appropriate assessment, held a strategy meeting and initiated child protection proceedings. This was in line with its statutory duties. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council responded to safeguarding concerns.
- The Council acknowledged it could not find evidence of it giving Miss X contact details for its mental health crisis team after she disclosed concerns about her mother’s mental health. However, I do not consider this means the Council failed to safeguard Miss X’s family. The safety plan contained actions about what to do in an emergency, including contacting the police or her neighbour. The social worker assessed Miss X’s mother and decided that support from her general practitioner was most appropriate in the circumstances. We cannot question the social worker’s professional judgement. There is not enough evidence of fault on this point to justify us investigating.
- The Council’s complaint response shows it took action to address concerns about food shortages. This included providing food parcels, supporting Ms Y with financial management, and social workers checking the availability of food in the home. I am satisfied the Council responded appropriately to those concerns and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.
- The Council’s complaint response also shows that it acknowledged the responsibility that was placed on Miss X in supporting Ms Y and caring for her siblings. The child protection plan recommended for Miss X to access support from talking therapies. It also helped with arranging care arrangements that were less burdensome on Miss X and provided financial support. I am therefore satisfied the Council considered Miss X’s needs and took steps to offer support and there is not enough evidence of fault on this point to justify us investigating.
Final decision
- We will not Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman