Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way in which the Council managed a change of placement for a foster child. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision to pass on information to the new carer. Additionally the Ombudsman cannot achieve the complainant’s desired outcomes relating to issues that the Council has upheld.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs Q, says that:
• During a change of placement for a child that she had been fostering, the Council informed the carer at the new placement that the reason for the move was that the child had made an allegations against her grandson. Mrs Q says this breached confidentiality;
• Her desired outcomes for issues that were upheld have not been met; and
• There was delay in the investigation of her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information provided by Mrs Q and by the Council. I have also sent Mrs Q a draft decision for her comments.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mrs Q is a foster carer in the Council’s area. She fostered a child, C, who made allegations against Mrs Q’s son. Initially the allegations were considered to be substantiated, although it was later agreed, following a second Section 47 investigation, that they could not be conclusively substantiated.
8. C was moved to a new placement. Mrs Q was unhappy about the Council’s investigation into the allegations against her grandson, as well as the disclosure of information about the allegations to the new foster carer. She complained to the Council. At stage two of the complaints procedure, most of the complaint was either upheld or partially upheld.
9. Mrs Q remains dissatisfied however. She feels that her desired outcomes have not been met, and she disagrees with the investigation findings on the element of her complaint that was not upheld. She has now brought the complaint to the LGSCO.
10. Mrs Q complains about the decision not to uphold one element of her complaint. This was the decision to inform the new carer for C of the allegations she made about S. The stage two investigator found that the Council made the decision in line with its Children’s Services Procedures Manual, which says that the new carer should be made of aware of all “relevant“ information.
11. We cannot question the merits of a decision that has been properly taken by the Council. In this case, it considered its procedure, and made a decision that the information was relevant and should be passed on. There is no fault in the way it made its decision, even though Mrs Q does not agree with the decision reached.
12. Mrs Q says that the information was not relevant because it included additional, personal information about her grandson. This point is not something that was raised and considered in the complaint to the Council, so I am unable to comment on it. If Mrs Q feels that a data breach occurred beyond the simple passing of the facts of the allegation to the new foster carer, she has the right to make that complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which the body set up to consider data breaches.
13. Mrs Q also feels that her desired outcomes in respect of the upheld elements of her complaint have not been met. She wants evidence to show that the initial record showing the allegations to be substantiated has been altered to show them to be unsubstantiated, and the revised record to be circulated. The Council agreed this would happen, and has told her that its Data Protection Team would be able to provide the evidence she seeks. The Ombudsman expects the Council to progress this without delay.
14. Mrs Q further says that she wants disciplinary action to be taken against the social worker involved. This is not something that we can achieve or investigate. Disciplinary procedures are out of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
15. The Council has also offered Mrs Q apologies for the parts of her complaint that have been upheld, and a time and trouble payment of £100. I regard these as appropriate remedies.
16. Finally, Mrs Q has complained that there was delay in investigating her complaint at stage one. However, it is not an efficient use of the Ombudsman’s resources to investigate complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the decision was made in respect of the substantive matter raised with the Ombudsman. We cannot achieve the desired outcomes on the other issues raised.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman