Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about children services actions. We are unlikely to find significant fault directly made a difference. There are other bodies who are better placed to consider his complaints about a social worker’s conduct and Council record keeping.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the way the Council’s children services team removed foster children from his care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council’s replies to his complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In May 2025 the Council decided to move children from Mr X who was fostering them. There is a dispute between Mr X and the Council about what arrangements were agreed in terms of dates and times. The Council in reply to Mr X’s complaint says it was an emergency and it accepts the children had a temporary illness at the time of removal.
6. Mr X complains about the removal timing. He also complains about the social worker’s conduct on the day. Both what they said and how they acted. Mr X is concerned about how the social worker cared for the children in the hours after they left his care. He disagrees with records kept and recollection of events.

Analysis

7. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Social workers have to make professional judgements about decisions such as the timing of moving children the Council looks after. It is unlikely our investigation could say there was significant fault in the events in this case which would have led to a significant difference.
8. The Ombudsman cannot investigate whether social workers are meeting their professional standards of conduct. Complaints of this nature should be referred to the social workers’ professional body, Social Work England.
9. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights. It promotes openness by public bodies and protects the privacy of individuals. It deals with complaints about public authorities’ failures to comply with data protection legislation. This includes the accuracy of information held.
10. There is no charge for making a complaint to the ICO, and its complaints’ procedure is relatively easy to use. Where someone has a complaint about data protection, the Ombudsman usually expects them to bring the matter to the attention of the ICO. This is because the ICO is in a better position than the Ombudsman to consider such complaints. I consider that to be the case here and Mr X should therefore approach the ICO about his concerns about the Council’s records of the events.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find significant fault which has caused a significant injustice and there are other bodies better placed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman