Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council has managed risk and communicated with him about the care of his children. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s investigation to justify further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not manage the risks posed by the mother of his children during supervised visits.
2. Mr X also complains the Council did not communicate effectively with him or the paternal grandfather of his children.
3. Mr X complains the Council did not make sufficient reasonable adjustments for him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council. The Council completed a detailed Stage 2 investigation under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The Council appointed an Investigating Officer and an Independent Person. They met with Mr X to agree his complaint. The Investigating Officer and Independent Person undertook a detailed investigation interviewing staff members and reviewing documentation. Each wrote a detailed report. The Independent Person agreed with the Investigating Officer’s report’s findings and recommendations. The Independent Person made a further recommendation.
8. The Council’s Adjudicating Officer wrote to Mr X accepting all the findings and recommendations made by the Investigating Officer and Independent Person. The Council apologised for the failings identified and agreed to carry out the recommendations which were made. Mr X was told that he could request a Stage 3 Review Panel if he was not satisfied with the investigation into his complaint. I cannot find evidence that Mr X asked for an escalation to Stage 3.
9. The Council appointed a suitable Investigating Officer and Independent Person who completed a detailed investigation at Stage 2 of the statutory children’s complaint procedure. We could not add to this investigation. As I cannot find sufficient evidence of fault in how the council carried out its investigation I cannot question the outcome.
10. If Mr X was dissatisfied with the investigation, it was reasonable for him to request escalation to Stage 3. Mr X did not do this.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman