Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council included fabricated information and opinion in its assessment relating to his children. This is because we are unlikely to find the Council at fault or to be able to achieve a different, more meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council included false information and opinion in an assessment report. This caused severe anxiety and depression for Mr X and his partner and has caused separation in the family.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr X provided when he complained to us.
4. I considered Mr X’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council completed an assessment of Mr X’s children in 2020. This included allegations made by the children about events in the family home.
6. Mr X contacted the Council about the content of the report as he wanted it to be amended. The Council told Mr X the information he wanted it to remove from the assessment was about the thoughts, feelings and wishes of professionals and the children.
7. I have viewed the list of comments Mr X provided to the Council. The statements he wants the Council to amend largely relate to allegations about him and his partner, that he does not agree are true. Mr X comments that the Council includes certain information to undermine him and says the social worker should have gathered different information to inform their assessment and should have asked his opinions on many of the statements before including them.
8. It is for the Council to decide what information it requires to inform its assessment, and it is for the Council to come to conclusions based on the information it gathers. Mr X provided us with quotes from the report and his comments. The information he provided does not lead me to believe we would find the Council has falsified information or presented it in a particular light to mislead the reader. The Council made an amendment to the report in light of Mr X’s comments, where it acknowledged this was necessary.
9. We could not require a council to remove information from reports, nor is there anything that leads me to believe in this case that would be appropriate. Mr X disagrees with allegations and views of others, and says one of the children has since retracted allegations. This does not mean the information should be removed from the document. It is for the Council to consider the validity of the original allegations, and the validity of their retraction.
10. The Council has made an amendment to the report where it agreed what it said did not accurately reflect events. The Council told Mr X it could attach his other comments to the assessment on file. This is appropriate and is sufficient to make clear to readers that Mr X is of the view there is incorrect information included. It is unlikely that our involvement would lead to a different, more meaningful outcome for Mr X.
11. If we investigated this complaint, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s actions. We also could not require the Council to close this family’s case or change the children’s social worker, as Mr X requests.

Back to top

Final decision

The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman