Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about children services’ actions. We are unlikely to achieve a significantly different outcome than already obtained.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s children services’ actions.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Background

5. The Council began looking after Mr X’s niece, D, in September 2021. She was14 and had been living with her father. Mr X lives in another part of the country but says he had seen her about once a month. Mr X sought a visit to see D now that she was ‘in care’. He says the Council unreasonably delayed in arranging this. He says its communication was poor.
6. Mr X saw D in December 2021 but has not seen her since. He says she remains cared for by the Council. Mr X complained about the delays. He says his family have generally been treated poorly. He mentions this includes D’s father, his brother. Mr X says he wants an independent investigation because he is concerned at the general overall behaviour of children services and how other families in the area could be similarly affected to his.
7. The Council in replying to his complaint, apologised for delays and the services actions towards him which had been below the expected level. It confirmed police checks had taken longer than they should have. It said Mr X did not have parental responsibility for D and therefore was not entitled to information about her care or the contact with others.

Analysis

8. We cannot accept a complaint from Mr X on behalf of D, or about the effect the lack of contact with Mr X has had on D. He does not have parental responsibility for her nor has he been a previous carer.
9. We cannot accept a complaint from Mr X on behalf of his brother without his consent.
10. The only part of Mr X’s complaint we could look at would be his two months without contact with D. I have considered the circumstances, in particular, his contact frequency before then and the Court’s involvement in considering D’s care during that period. It is unlikely we would achieve a significantly different outcome for Mr X than the apology already given.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to achieve a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman