Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a social worker’s actions at a visit. It is unlikely we would find fault, and Social Work England is better placed to consider a complaint about the officer’s professionalism.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms X, complains about a Council children service’s social worker’s conduct.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complain. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. Ms X had an opportunity to comment on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In December 2020, the Council replied at its final corporate complaints procedure stage, to Ms X’s complaint made the previous summer about a prearranged social worker’s home visit. Ms X’s complaint centres around this visit and includes:
1. The reasoning for the visit.
2. The social worker’s use of words during the visit, which Ms X says made her feel uncomfortable.
3. The social worker’s request for Ms X’s medical records or evidence.
4. That following the meeting the social worker did not apologise to Ms X for the harm they had caused her by the meeting.
5. The records the Council holds about her child’s health.
6. The social worker discussing the possibility and risks of Ms X’s family circumstances being discussed on media outlets.
8. The Council’s final reply explains its position on all these issues.

Analysis

9. The social worker is assigned to Ms X’s child. The social worker’s decisions in points a), b), c), e) and f) are a professional judgement whether to raise or ask those questions. It is unlikely we would find fault on those points.
10. In respect of point (d) above, and the social worker’s overall behaviour, our role is to investigate the actions of the Council as a corporate body, not to hold a single officer accountable. If Ms X has concerns about the professionalism or integrity of an individual social worker, it is reasonable to expect her to report her concerns to their professional body, Social Work England.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault and there is another body better placed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman