Summary: the Health and Care Professions Council found the social worker dealing with Ms X and her children in 2015 breached standards of conduct, performance and ethics, and his actions put Ms X at risk of harm. The Council has apologised and offered a payment of £1,000. I consider this a satisfactory response.

The complaint

1. Ms X, complains about the actions of a social worker whom she found bullying and intimidating. She says the social worker bullied her into leaving her home when she was heavily pregnant; placed her oldest child with relatives and threatened her that she would never see her children again if she did not co-operate. She is unhappy with the Council’s response to her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered:
• information provided by Ms X;
• information provided by the Council
• the ruling of the Health and Care Professions Council; and
• Guidance on good practice: remedies, published by the Local Government Ombudsman in 2019.
5. I invited Ms X and the Council to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. The events about which Ms X complains date back to 2014 and the early part of 2015. Complaints to the Ombudsman should normally be made within 12 months. Ms X first complained to the Ombudsman in 2017. We decided her complaint was late and there were no good reasons for us to investigate. We said that even if we were to investigate, there was nothing significant we could achieve for Ms X. The main issue was the professional conduct and fitness to practice of a social worker. That is not a matter for the Ombudsman but is something which has to be dealt with by the Council as an employer and by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) which regulates professional standards.
7. Since then, the Council has referred the social worker to the HCPC. A Tribunal found he was not fit to practice and has de-registered him. Ms X says the first she knew of this was when she read coverage in the press.
8. Ms X complained again. She said she wanted the Council to correct errors in its records and pay compensation. The Council appointed an independent investigator to consider her complaint. The Council upheld most of Ms X’s complaints. The Council has apologised and invited Ms X to review her records with an officer to point out mistakes. The Council has offered Ms X a payment of £1,000 for her distress.
9. Ms X remains dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman. She thinks the Council should pay more compensation.

Consideration

10. Ms X has been vindicated by the HCPC. A Tribunal found the social worker had breached the HCPC standards of conduct, performance and ethics, and his actions put Ms X at risk of harm. The findings concerned the social worker’s dealings with Ms X’s former partner.
11. The Council has acknowledged the HCPC findings and has set out the action it proposes to take. The Council has apologised, invited Ms X to review her records, and offered a payment of £1,000.
12. I am satisfied the independent investigator carried out a fair and thorough investigation of Ms X’s complaint. I agree with the investigator’s findings and recommendations. I will not reinvestigate the complaint myself.
13. Ms X complains to the Ombudsman because she is unhappy with the compensation the Council has offered.
14. We have published guidance to explain how we calculate remedies for people who have suffered injustice as a result of fault by a council. Our primary aim is to put people back in the position they would have been in if the fault by the Council had not occurred. When this is not possible, as in the case of Ms X and her children, we may recommend the Council makes a symbolic payment to acknowledge what could have been avoidable distress, harm or risk.
15. When the Ombudsman recommends a payment for distress, we only take account of avoidable distress that is the result of fault by the Council. A remedy payment for distress is often a moderate sum of between £100 and £300.
16. Where the fault exposed the individual to the risk of harm, rather than actual harm, the Ombudsman may recommend a remedy payment of up to £500. Where the risk was significant, or harm actually occurred, we may recommend a payment of up to £1,500.
17. In this case, the Council’s role was to respond to allegations that Ms X’s children were at risk of harm. I have not investigated the Council’s actions as it is too late to do so now. I make no findings or recommendations in respect of the actions the Council took in response to the allegations Ms X’s children were at risk of harm. However, the HCPC found that the social worker had breached the HCPC’s standards for conduct, performance and ethics. The HCPC concluded that some of the social worker’s actions put Ms X at risk. The Council has offered Ms X a payment of £1,000 in recognition of the HCPC’s findings.
18. I have carefully considered the evidence. I accept Ms X’s dealings with the social worker will have been a source of considerable distress, and the social worker’s actions put her at risk. Learning about the HCPC’s findings in the press will have caused Ms X additional distress. I consider the Council’s offer of £1,000 is an appropriate symbolic payment to recognise the impact of the faults on Ms X and her children.

Back to top

Final decision

19. The HCPC found the social worker dealing with Ms X and her children in 2015 breached the HCPC standards of conduct, performance and ethics, and his actions put Ms X at risk of harm. The Council has apologised and offered a payment of £1,000. I consider this satisfactory. I have ended my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman