Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a complaint about the use of false information. This is because any injustice caused to the complainant by the Council’s actions is insufficient to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, complains that the Council has not responded reasonably to her complaint about the use of false information by the Director of Children’s Services.

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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms B says the Council’s Director of Children’s Services twice made false statements about her with the intention of undermining her credibility with her MP and unfairly influencing an investigation under the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services. She further complains about the Council’s response to her complaint.
6. Ms B wants the Council to reopen her complaint and respond to it in full. She also wants substantial financial compensation.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint. While I have no reason to doubt that Ms B has been caused some distress by what she sees as the malicious use of false information, I do not find that any injustice she may have been caused warrants the Ombudsman’s intervention.
8. Ms B argues that the Director first shared the false information with her MP in order to undermine her credibility with him. Without taking any view on the veracity of the information itself, I have seen no evidence to suggest that it had the effect Ms B claims and, if so, demonstrably caused her negative consequences. That being the case, there are insufficient grounds for us to intervene.
9. The second instance Ms B refers to occurred during the consideration of her complaint against Children’s Services under the statutory procedure. Ms B argues that the Director shared the information to influence the outcome of Stage 2 of the process against her. However, given that the complaint was subsequently substantially upheld at Stage 3, it is not possible to find that the information had a negative impact on the outcome.
10. We will not investigate Ms B’s concerns about the Council’s response to her complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures if, as is the case here, the substantive issue does not itself fall to be investigated.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because the Council’s actions have caused insufficient injustice to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman