Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a breach of confidentiality because another body is better placed to do so. We will not investigate whether the Council failed to provide appropriate support for the complainant’s child because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as X, complains that the Council has been at fault in breaching their child’s confidentiality and in failing to provide appropriate support for their needs.

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. X’s child, who I will refer to as Y, was the subject of a referral to children’s services. Soon after the referral, a social worker breached Y’s confidentiality in a conversation with a third party. The Council has accepted fault but X is not satisfied with its response. They believe it has been dismissive of the impact of the breach on Y.
6. The Ombudsman will not investigate this aspect of X’s complaint. If they are dissatisfied with the Council’s response they may bring their concerns to the attention of the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is the appropriate body to consider such matters. It is better placed than the Ombudsman to do so and we will not intervene.
7. X further complains that the Council failed to put proper support in place for Y. Specifically, they complain that an early support worker was only allocated in March 2023, despite the case being open since November 2022. They also complain that the Council has declined to escalate their complaint about the alleged lack of support.
8. The evidence shows that the Council’s initial complaint response was made in December 2022. It set out that a number of professionals had been allocated to work with Y and that ongoing support could be discussed with their social worker. X was not satisfied with this response and met with the Council in January 2023. At that point, the Council agreed to explore early help for the family. I understand that early help contacted the family in February 2023, with a support worker allocated in March 2023.
9. We will not investigate this aspect of X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would identify fault on the Council’s part. The complaint has been considered at two stages and has concluded. The Council is entitled to decline to escalate it further and we will not criticise for doing so. The fact that X is not happy with the response does not mean it must be escalated if the Council has set out its final position.
10. Turning to the substantive matter, the evidence does not support X’s contention that appropriate support was delayed. The undertaking to consider early help was given in January 2023 and a support worker was allocated within a reasonable time. It is not for the Ombudsman to say that this support should have been provided earlier. That is a matter for the professional judgement of the Council’s officers and we will not intervene to criticise it, or to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate X’s complaint. Another body is better placed to consider issues around the breach of confidentiality, and we would be unlikely to find that the Council was at fault in service provision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman