Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with the complainant and her daughter because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss B, complains that the Council was at fault in the course of its involvement with her family.

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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss B’s daughter has been treated as a Child in Need by the Council. She has also been the subject of private law proceedings. In the course of the proceedings, the Judge directed the Council to produce a Section 37 report.
6. Miss B complains that the social worker who produced the Section 37 report misrepresented the facts and thereby misled the Court. She further complains that the social worker has failed to carry out the visits required to support her daughter as a Child in Need. Miss B complained to the Council and says it failed to respond reasonably.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint. Section 37 reports are the property of the court and, by law, the Ombudsman cannot investigate their content or how they are produced. This aspect of the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction and we cannot consider it.
8. Miss B’s complaint about other aspects of the Child in Need process has already been substantially upheld. I understand her daughter’s case has been, or will be, closed by the Council. There is therefore nothing substantial to be achieved by our intervention. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures where we are unable to deal with the substantive matters. That is the case here.
9. Miss B also says the Council has failed to provide her with relevant documents, despite the fact that she made a formal data request. Complaints about access to information can be brought to the attention of the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is better placed than the Ombudsman to consider them. We will not intervene.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because we can achieve nothing significant by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman