Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his child’s case. There is not enough evidence of fault in relation to the Council’s safeguarding actions. Other matters were considered, or could have been considered, in Court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his child’s case. He says the Council failed to consider safeguarding concerns he raised about his child. He also complains the Council was biased, failed to consider his evidence and relied on inaccurate information during Court proceedings.
2. Mr X says the matter has disrupted contact with his child and caused a decline in his mental health. He wants a meaningful remedy to address the injustice caused to his family. He also wants the Council to acknowledge its errors and correct its records.

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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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)
6. We also 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

7. I also considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The complaint response shows that in 2024, the Council received several safeguarding referrals in relation to Mr X's child. In response to those referrals, the Council:
• conducted multi-agency strategy meetings;
• completed medical assessments;
• undertook safeguarding enquiries; and
• implemented a child protection plan.
10. The action taken is in line with the Council’s statutory safeguarding duties and the types of action we would expect a council to take in response to safeguarding concerns. There is not enough evidence of fault on this point to justify us investigating.

Biased and inaccurate records

11. If Mr X disagreed with evidence relied upon during Court then it would have been reasonable for him to dispute those during the court proceedings. We cannot investigate any allegations of bias or factual inaccuracies in any reports used in Court as these form part of the Court proceedings. We also cannot say whether the evidence relied on impacted the Court outcome. Therefore, I will not investigate this aspect of his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman