Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the information the Council included in an assessment relating to the complainant’s child. This is because we would achieve nothing significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss X, complains that the Council included false information in an assessment report and has failed to acknowledge that it was at fault.

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. Miss X’s child was the subject of Child in Need action. Miss X complains that the assessment the Council carried out contained numerous inaccuracies. She says the Council failed to justify its view that her child was at risk of emotional abuse and the social worker failed to take account of her views.
6. Miss X made a complaint to the Council. She says the Council’s responses failed to acknowledge the errors in the assessment or those in the final documents which led to the case staying open for two weeks longer than necessary. She wants an apology and an acknowledgement from the Council that it was at fault.
7. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint in part and has apologised to her for the fault identified, including factual errors in the assessment. It has declined to make changes to its assessment but has offered to include a statement of Miss X’s views on its file.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is nothing significant to be achieved by doing so. It is not for us to say whether the Council’s Child in Need action was justified, and I note the action has now finished. Miss X has received an apology from the Council and the Ombudsman’s intervention to ask for another is not warranted.
9. Turning to the accuracy of the assessment, we would not ask for an assessment to be altered retrospectively. This is because it reflects the views of the officers at the time it was written. The most we would normally seek to achieve is that a statement of the complainant’s views on the assessment’s accuracy is added to the case file. The Council has already offered to do this. There is nothing further for the Ombudsman to achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman