Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s social work visit to her home to assess her as a carer for her grandchild. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because the assessment and report are part of court proceedings.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council’s social worker was ‘extremely offensive’ during a visit to assess her to care for her granddaughter who is the subject of court proceedings. Ms X says the Council produced a viability report which was ‘a work of fiction’, factually inaccurate, and which libelled her. Ms X says the Council was late in telling her the date by which she could challenge the report at court.
2. Ms X complains the Council’s handling of her complaint was delayed and inadequate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered Ms X’s information and comments. The information includes the complaint correspondence with the Council.

Back to top

What I found

7. The Council is taking care proceedings on Ms X’s grandchild who is in care. The Council says the court ordered a viability assessment of Ms X which it undertook during the summer. It is not supporting the possibility that Ms X should have a caring role due to her vulnerabilities. The Council advised Ms X that if she disagrees with the report or wants further assessment she should raise the issue at court.
8. In July Ms X complained to the Council about the social worker’s visit. She says the visit lasted 3 hours and she felt she was ‘on trial’. On 9 August the Council sent her its stage 1 reply. The final reply is dated 10 October. The Council said it could not find some information from Ms X but confirmed in its letter, 10 October, that it had had the information all the time and that it was an officer oversight in not locating it.

Analysis

9. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint because it is outside our jurisdiction (see paragraph 4 above). The Council’s viability assessment and report are part of court proceedings considering the welfare of the child. The social worker’s actions are on behalf of the court. The Council correctly advised Ms X that she could challenge the content of the report at court.
10. There is no injustice which is separable from the court process. The Ombudsman will not normally investigate complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive complaint. In this case, we cannot investigate the actions of the social worker which is central to the complaint to the Council.
11. If Ms X is concerned the Council holds inaccurate personal information about her she may seek advice from the Information Commissioner (see paragraph 5). The Council confirmed it had not lost her information and so that concern was resolved.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman can not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s social work visit to her home to assess her as a carer for her grandchild. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because the assessment and report are part of court proceedings.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman