Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to implement the recommendations of the Review Panel held in December 2022 and it continues to repeat failings previously acknowledged. Mr X says it is emotionally and mentally draining to keep making the same complaint. The Council has taken action recommended by the Review Panel as well as making Mr X a payment of £650 to acknowledge his distress and time and trouble. While there is limited evidence regarding the “file review” and adopting a “fresh perspective” this is not fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to implement the recommendations of the complaint determined at Review Panel in December 2022 and it continues to repeat the failings previously acknowledged.
2. He says it is draining emotionally and mentally to keep making the same complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Court reports

6. As part of private law proceedings involving children, the court may ask the Council to produce a section 7 or 37 report. The court will then consider the report as part of its decision making.
7. Because section 7 and 37 reports form part of court proceedings, we have no jurisdiction to investigate their preparation or content.

Three-stage statutory complaint procedure

8. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail. We also published practitioner guidance on the procedures, setting out our expectations.
9. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
10. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigating officer (IO) to look into the complaint and an independent person (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence.
11. Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The officer considers the IO report and any report from the IP. They decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take. The adjudicating officer should then write to the complainant with a copy of the investigation report, any report from the independent person and the adjudication response.
12. If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel.

Key facts

13. Mr X has a son but is separated from the child’s mother. He made complaints about the way the Council dealt with him when dealing with child protection issues. Mr X believes the Council has repeatedly treated him as a perpetrator of domestic abuse even though there is no evidence of this. He says his views and evidence are ignored and the process is very biased in favour of mothers.
14. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint through the three stage statutory children's procedure in 2022. Mr X made nine complaints about the Council’s actions. The Independent Investigator, at stage two of the statutory process upheld all nine complaints. This was the second complaint Mr X had made about the involvement of children’s social care with his family.
15. The stage three review panel hearing was held on 19 December 2022. The report of the meeting states it did not reconsider the complaints investigated at stage two but focussed on Mr X’s concern that despite making complaints, nothing had changed.
16. The Review Panel findings noted that it was agreed by all parties that there was a need for change in the way council officers work with Mr X. Mr X raised issues about failures to inform him of new allegations, that it has been suggested again he work in a perpetrators programme and that there were outstanding actions from the stage two adjudication response. The panel noted that these mirrored issues raised previously and so took the view that there must be action to prevent the need for Mr X to make further complaints.
17. The Review Panel recommended a timescale of the end of January 2023 for the stage two action to review the file to “ensure that future decision making is taken from a fresh perspective”. It also recommended that Mr X be offered a meeting with the Council to discuss and agree exactly what that “fresh perspective” will entail and to inform all staff involved in the case of the decisions from that meeting. The Review Panel also recommended the Council give consideration to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies in respect of the distress and frustration Mr X experienced as a result of pursuing complaints. It is noted the Council offered Mr X a payment of £300 at the outcome of the stage two complaint which was £150 for his time and trouble in making the complaint and £150 for any distress caused.
18. Following the outcome of the Review Panel, the Council wrote to Mr X on 23 January 2023. It stated it was in agreement with the Review Panel recommendations and would also give consideration to Mr X’s desired outcomes from his stage two complaint. It also offered Mr X a further payment of £350 to acknowledge the delay in implementing the stage two actions and his continued distress.
19. The Council met with Mr X on 22 March. Mr X was able to express his concerns about Children’s Services. It was agreed to send documents to Mr X that he said had not been previously provided as well as agreeing to send draft minutes following any future meetings. In response to concerns about being characterised as a domestic abuse perpetrator, the Council says it had changed the language used but that his ex-partner could seek help from domestic abuse support organisations and it could not stop that. It also said it would send copies of any section 7 court reports to him after filing with the court.
20. To address issues such as Mr X’s belief that he is wrongfully portrayed as a domestic abuse perpetrator and the cycle of making complaints, the Council commissioned an independent report. This process began in November 2022 before the stage three Review Panel met. The Independent Investigator met with Mr X and also attended the meetings he had with the Council.
21. A meeting with Mr X and the Independent Investigator took place on 24 May. The Independent Investigator says this was a lengthy discussion and that although Mr X acknowledged that numerous issues had been resolved, his central concerns remained. After the meeting Mr X sent his synopsis of the situation and set out what he considered would be a route to resolution. This included the re-writing of a court report; a new social worker, removal of the Stay Safe Together protocol and the exclusion of a domestic abuse charity from the Children in Need process.
22. A further meeting was held to discuss if it could meet Mr X’s desired outcome. The report prepared by the Independent Investigator concluded that taking further action was pointless because:
• A request to change the social worker was redundant as the Children in Need case was now closed;
• The removal of the Stay Safe Together Protocol was non-negotiable as it was council policy;
• The inclusion of the domestic abuse charity was arranged by Mr X’s ex-partner and so the Council had no control; and
• Court report issues should be queried in the court process.
23. The report said that while there was initial optimism that work could be done to reassure Mr X that his concerns had been addressed, it became apparent this would not be achieved. The Independent Investigator concluded his report by saying he was unsure how serious Mr X’s expressed wish for resolution was.

Analysis

24. Mr X says that despite making several complaints the Council continues to repeat failings even when his complaints are upheld.
25. I note the Council took action in respect of the findings of the review panel held in December 2022. I have seen evidence to show it met with Mr X and shared the findings of that meeting with staff involved in the case. It also offered a further payment of £350 to acknowledge delay and distress. In response to my enquiries the Council accepted errors meant Mr X had not yet received the payments, but it was taking action to resolve this.
26. The Council has ended its involvement with Mr X’s son and the case is closed. This will therefore end the cycle of repeat failings and provides some resolution. However, it is possible further allegations could be made and the wellbeing of Mr X’s son will always have to be the Council’s primary consideration.
27. One aspect I am not clear about is whether the action to “review the case file to ensure future decision making is taken from a fresh perspective” has been carried out. What is meant by “review” is unclear and unspecific. It is therefore difficult to say whether this has happened. There is agreement to change the language used and share draft minutes with Mr X. All officers involved in the case were updated on the agreed actions. I consider it is difficult for the Council to evidence that a “fresh perspective” has been taken or that Mr X would be satisfied with any assurances the Council can provide on this point.
28. I am satisfied the Council has made efforts to implement the recommendations agreed as part of the complaints process. I consider the appointment of an Independent Investigator in November 2022 was a genuine attempt by it to provide resolution and closure to Mr X so he did not need to continue to make complaints. However, Mr X remains dissatisfied. So while there is limited evidence to show a “fresh perspective” was taken, I do not find fault. In reaching this view I have to give some weight to the Independent Investigator’s position that it is unlikely these matters can ever be resolved to Mr X’s satisfaction.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I will now complete my investigation as there is no evidence of fault that has not already been remedied.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman