Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainant’s concerns about her daughter’s care. This is because we could not achieve anything significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss X, complains that the Council has failed to respond reasonably to her concerns about her daughter’s 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 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 the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X’s daughter is subject to a full care order and lives with foster carers. Miss X complains that the Council has not responded reasonably to the fact that the foster carers will not engage with her or her family. She says this is due to false information contained in a risk assessment. She further complains that her daughter was not made aware that she could attend professionals’ meetings.
6. It is Miss X’s view that the Council is failing to address what amounts to parental alienation and, as a result, she is excluded from participation in decisions relating to her daughter.
7. There are insufficient grounds for the Ombudsman to pursue Miss X’s complaint. It is not for us to question the decision of the foster carers not to engage with her and her family. The Council says it is working with the foster carers to address the matter and I have no reason to doubt that this is the case. There are no grounds for us to intervene.
8. The Council says its records show that Miss X’s daughter was aware that her mother could attend professionals’ meetings. Miss X disagrees, but I attach no significance to this difference of views. The complaint correspondence indicates that Miss X’s daughter does not want her mother to attend such meetings and the Council’s actions are in line with her wishes. That is a decision for the Council to make, and which we would not question. Investigation would not therefore achieve anything significant.
9. If Miss X believes she is being unreasonably excluded from matters relating to her daughter’s life, it is open to her to ask the courts to make new arrangements. This is her recourse. Investigation by the Ombudsman cannot achieve this for her and is not warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman