Summary: Miss X complained the Council caused distress by disclosing her address to her abusive ex-partner. There is fault and the Council has agreed to pay Miss X £500 to remedy the risk of harm and distress caused. Miss X also complained about the social worker’s conduct and the Council’s failure to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. There is no fault on this aspect of Miss X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council disclosed her home address to her emotionally abusive ex-partner and this caused her distress as she feared for her safety. Miss X also complains the Council has not responded to her request to escalate her complaint to stage 2 of the statutory children’s complaints procedure.

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).
4. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered Miss X’s complaint and the information she provided.
6. I considered the information I received from the Council.
7. Miss X and the Council were invited to comment on a draft of this decision. I have considered the comments I received from Miss X. The Council said it accepted my findings.

Back to top

What I found

8. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. Section 26(3) of the Children Act 1989 provides that all functions of the local authority under Part 3 of the Act may form the subject of a complaint under this procedure.
9. The Government has provided guidance for local authorities, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’ (the Guidance) on the operation of the complaints procedure.
10. Miss X and Mr P had a child together, C, in January 2014.
11. In March 2018, Miss X left Mr P due to emotional abuse and coercive control. Children’s Services were alerted, and a Child Social Work assessment commenced.
12. In June 2018, Miss X submitted a complaint to the Council about the conduct of the social worker, Ms S. Miss X complained that Ms S failed to take adequate notes of meetings, failed to properly consider the concerns Miss X was raising, arrived late for appointments and acted in a way that was biased and in favour of Mr P.
13. On 28 June 2018, the Council acknowledged Miss X’s complaint would be investigated under the statutory children’s complaints procedure at stage 1 and it invited Ms X to meet with council officers to discuss her concerns. The Council met with Ms X on 3 July 2018.
14. Miss X chased the Council for a response to her stage 1 complaint on 17 July 2018.
15. The Council sent its stage 1 response to Miss X via email on 17 July 2018. The letter was dated 6 July 2018.
16. The Council’s stage 1 response said the following:
• It should have advised Miss X it had extended the time to complete the assessment. The Council apologised it did not give clear information about the children services social work assessment process.
• Ms S had altered an appointment time with Miss X but failed to communicate this with her. The Council apologised for this and the anxiety it caused. It said it had discussed this with Ms S and reminded her of the need to ensure appointment times are made clear if arrangements change.
• The case had gone beyond the 40-day timescale period which Miss X was advised it would be completed within. The Council said the assessment had been completed within the 40-day timescale but there was a delay in it being signed off by a manger. The Council apologised for this delay.
• The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint that Ms S’s failure to take notes of meetings resulted in several points being misinterpreted and miscommunicated. Ms S had said that she did not believe she misinterpreted information.
• The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint that Ms S incorrectly informed Miss X about Mr P’s previous domestic related incidents. The Council said that on this occasion no names were used, it felt the discussions were appropriate and it had not released sensitive information.
• The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint that Ms S had not taken on board her concerns yet quickly followed up concerns raised by Mr P.
17. Miss X was unhappy with the Council’s stage 1 response and requested it to be escalated to stage 2. She also requested the Council make service improvements such as a text message service to confirm appointments with the social worker and social workers to take notes at meetings to prevent matters being misinterpreted.
18. On 22 August 2018, the Council emailed Miss X and offered a meeting with the officer who is responsible for the social work teams and is also investigating Miss X’s corporate complaint. The Council said that it was not preventing Miss X from accessing the next stage of the statutory complaints process but it felt the meeting would allow her the opportunity to discuss her concerns and the officer is best placed to consider her desired outcomes.
19. Miss X met with the Council on 12 September 2018. The Council acknowledged some inaccuracies had been recorded from Miss X’s meetings with the social worker. The Council said these meetings are primarily information gathering meetings and as such the information needs to be accurate and the social worker accountable for ensuring accuracy. The Council said it would take this on board across all of its safeguarding units and it had met Miss X’s stated outcome by implementing the action that she had requested.
20. The Council implemented technology enabling social workers to see and review their diary commitments when they are out in the community. The Council said it had implemented what she had requested and it was unsure what a further investigation could achieve.
21. The Council did not feel an incident where a concern raised by Miss X was not addressed with Mr P in a timely way was a result of bias towards Mr P.
22. As the Council had met the outcomes Miss X had requested it was unsure what a stage 2 investigation could further explore. The Council asked Miss X to contact its complaints team if she wished to request a stage 2 statutory complaint.
23. Miss X then brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.
24. Miss X also complained the Council failed to update the Child Social Work Assessment report with her amendments to her satisfaction and the Council also delayed in issuing the amended report.

Miss X’s corporate complaint

25. On 17 July 2018, Miss X notified the Council she was concerned that it had sent paperwork to Mr P that included her home address.
26. The Council advised Miss X on 18 July 2018 that, due to human error, it had disclosed her address to Mr P. It said it would investigate the matter and Miss X could submit a corporate complaint if she wished.
27. Miss X submitted her corporate complaint to the Council and its stage 1 response upheld her complaint. The Council said Miss X’s address should have been redacted as it was a domestic abuse case. In its response, the Council said:

“…on this occasion personal and sensitive data has been disclosed to an incorrect recipient, resulting in it being viewed by an unauthorised individual with the potential to cause damage and distress to you”.

28. The Council took the following action:
• Advised the Information Commissioner about the data breach;
• Provided the social worker with training on privacy and data protection; and
• Apologised to Miss X.
29. Miss X was dissatisfied with the Council’s response to her complaint and she requested it to be escalated to stage 2 of the corporate complaints procedure. Miss X did not consider an apology was a satisfactory response, she felt the disclosure of her address was a deliberate act and not due to human error.
30. Miss X discussed her corporate complaint with the council officer she met on 12 September 2018. Miss X said she had made changes to her driveway so she can park closer to her house rather than the end of the garden. Miss X confirmed Mr P had not made any attempts to visit her property or made any threats against her.
31. On 24 September 2018 the Council sent its stage 2 review response to Miss X. It acknowledged the situation had created anxiety for Miss X and it apologised for the impact the Council’s failure had on her.
32. The Council considered the training for the social worker to be appropriate due to recent changes in data protection legislation. It found no evidence to support Miss X’s allegation the disclosure of her address was intentional. The Council explained the social worker had sent out the report in the Clerks absence and the Clerk would usually check for matters relating to confidentiality.
33. Miss X was dissatisfied with the Council’s stage 2 response to her corporate complaint, so she brought it to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

Miss X’s statutory complaint

34. The Council has agreed to implement the service improvements Miss X requested and has therefore met the desired outcomes for some of her complaints.
35. Miss X says when she met with the Council in September 2018, the council officer had acknowledged there was some evidence of bias but the Council had wrote to her on 24 September 2018 to say there was no bias.
36. The letter dated 24 September 2018 says there was no bias when there was a delay in Ms S acting upon a concern Miss X had raised. It does not say there was no bias in the assessment report.
37. In its response to my enquiries, the Council acknowledged the assessment report was biased towards Mr P in terms of the recording of the information. This is fault.
38. Miss X provided the Council information she felt had been missed from the assessment. The Council has updated the assessment report. I have had sight of the amended assessment report and it clearly references the views of both Mr P and Miss X. I consider the Council has responded in a satisfactory manner by amending the report to reflect both sides. The Council also apologised for the delay in issuing the report.
39. In the letter dated 24 September 2018 from the Council, it asks Miss X to confirm if she would still like to proceed with stage 2 investigation of her complaint. Instead of responding to the Council, Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. Miss X has not advised the Council if she would like proceed with a stage 2 investigation of her complaint. However, as the Council cannot amend the assessment in the way Miss X is requesting, I cannot see what further investigation could achieve for Miss X.

Miss X’s corporate complaint

40. The Council’s internal emails show that Miss X left Mr P due to his emotionally abusive behaviour and her address was meant to remain confidential with a police marker. The Council has acknowledged Miss X’s address was disclosed to Mr P due to human error. This is fault.
41. Miss X says she feared for her safety and had to make modifications to her home to make herself feel safe. The disclosure not only caused distress but placed Miss X at risk of harm.
42. The Council informed the Information Commissioner of the breach and provided relevant training to the social worker. The Council apologised to Miss X but I do not consider this sufficiently remedies the injustice.

Agreed action

43. The Council has already apologised to Miss X and referred the disclosure to the Information Commissioner.
44. To remedy the injustice to Miss X, specifically the risk of harm and distress caused by the Council disclosing Miss X’s address to her abusive ex-partner, the Council will pay Miss X £500 within four weeks of my final decision.
45. Within six weeks of my final decision, the Council will investigate the reason why Miss X’s address was disclosed to her ex-partner, it will review the relevant processes and implement measures/processes to ensure domestic abuse victims details remain confidential.

Back to top

Final decision

The Council was at fault for disclosing Miss X’s address to her abusive ex-partner. It has agreed to our recommendation to pay Miss X £500 to remedy the risk of harm and distress caused and it has also agreed to our service improvement recommendations. Therefore, my investigation is complete, and this complaint is closed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman