Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council wrongly decided he posed a risk of harm to children. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council wrongly decided he posed a risk of harm to children.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I read Mr X’s complaint and documents he supplied, including evidence the Council relied on in reaching its view. I gave Mr X an opportunity to comment on a draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council conducted a safeguarding investigation into Mr X’s actions, which he said reflected “romantic interests” in girls under 16. The safeguarding investigation decided his actions amounted to grooming and that he posed a risk of harm to children. The evidence presented meant it was a matter of judgement, not fault, for the Council to reach the decision it took.

Back to top

Final decision

6. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman