Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the care of his grandchild, Child Y. There isn’t enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making. We also cannot investigate matters that relate to court proceedings.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the decision to remove Child Y from the care of his aunt and uncle. He says Child Y should have been allowed to live with him and has raised concerns about the process to decide if he was a suitable guardian. He complains there were multiple social workers involved which delayed the process. He says this delayed the guardianship application process, limited his ability to keep contact with Child Y and negatively affected their relationship.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Safeguarding concerns were raised about Child Y, who was removed from the care of their aunt and uncle, following a voluntary section 20 arrangement. This was agreed by the mother, who holds parental responsibility. Later an Interim Care Order was granted. As this was a matter considered and decided by the court, we cannot investigate the decision or matters directly related to it, including the actions of social workers in connection with the court proceedings. This is because we cannot consider matters about court proceedings.
7. Mr X says Child Y should have been allowed to live with him as they had previously been in his care. The Council carried out detailed assessments of all potential guardians for Child Y, including meetings and, where relevant, discussions with character witnesses. The Council decided that Mr X and his wife were suitable guardians should they wish to complete an application. The evidence shows the Council considered Child Y’s welfare throughout the process. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.
8. Mr X says the delay in the assessment led him to withdraw his application for guardianship of Child Y. While I understand his frustration, the evidence shows that both Mr X and the Council were focused on achieving the best result for Child Y. The decision to withdraw the application was Mr X’s, and there is not enough evidence that any fault by the Council caused him to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot investigate matters that relate to court proceedings.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman