Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Child protection


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (21 014 317)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 05-May-2022

    Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Miss B's complaint about the Council's children's services department in the 1990s. There is nothing we could achieve which would make things better for Miss B or for other people in the same situation.

  • Wokingham Borough Council (21 007 447)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 28-Apr-2022

    Summary: Mr X complained of racism, mental health discrimination, and other bias by the Council during a child protection investigation. He said the Council's faults caused harm to his child, caused him to lose his livelihood, and affected his health. The Council accepted fault about provision of an advocate, information sharing and communication prior to the Ombudsman's intervention. It has apologised for this. We are satisfied this remedy is appropriate and there is no further fault by the Council.

  • Oxfordshire County Council (21 017 421)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 28-Apr-2022

    Summary: We uphold Mr X's complaint, as the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage two of the children's statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to complete its stage two without further delay and make a payment for the delay so far.

  • Staffordshire County Council (21 006 997)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 28-Apr-2022

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to adequately safeguard her niece Y and did not investigate information she provided indicating Y was at risk of harm. Miss X also complained the Council unfairly restricted access between Miss X's family and Y. There was no fault with the Council's actions.

  • Wiltshire Council (21 011 707)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 26-Apr-2022

    Summary: Ms X complained about errors during the Council's pre-birth safeguarding assessment processes. The Council was not at fault.

  • Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 199)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 21-Apr-2022

    Summary: Ms E complained the Council failed to follow child protection procedures when it was involved with her family. We find the Council was at fault for allowing Ms E's son to visit his grandmother without her knowledge or consent. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms E to reflect her injustice.

  • Surrey County Council (21 018 022)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 06-Apr-2022

    Summary: We will uphold Ms X's complaint, as the Council delayed considering a complaint at stage two of its corporate complaints' procedure. The Council has agreed to complete its stage two without further delay and make a payment for the delay so far.

  • Staffordshire County Council (20 001 918)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 06-Apr-2022

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to follow its own safeguarding procedures correctly when it became involved with her and her family. She also complained the Council failed to progress her complaint to Stage 2 after she asked it to. She said this caused her and her family emotional distress and led her to suffer financial loss. There was fault identified in the Council's management of the safeguarding investigation. The Council has already taken actions to identify the fault but it has agreed to also provide Mrs X with a £800 financial award.

  • Liverpool City Council (21 017 299)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 05-Apr-2022

    Summary: The Council is at fault for delaying consideration of this complaint under the children's statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to make a payment to the complainant for the time and trouble its delay has caused

  • Birmingham City Council (21 013 618)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 03-Apr-2022

    Summary: Mrs X complains about child protection intervention completed by the Council. She is unhappy with how the Council dealt with its Section 17 and Section 47 assessments. We propose to discontinue our investigation. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.