Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a safeguarding incident she reported which took place at her child’s school. Any fault has not caused injustice to her.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the actions of the school and the Council following an alleged safeguarding incident involving her child when they were at school.
2. Ms X says this has caused her and her child anxiety and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X’s child reported an incident to Ms X in which another child allegedly pulled their hair and assaulted them at school.
8. Ms X complained to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO). The LADO is the Council officer to whom incidents where a professional or volunteer may have harmed, or risked harm to, a child must be reported.
9. Ms X was unhappy with how the LADO responded to her and complained again. The Council said there had been delays but other than that, the LADO had acted in line with its procedures. It apologised and agreed to update its records to ensure all parties’ perspectives and conclusions were recorded. The Council also advised the school about how to best advise and support in similar situations in future.
10. Ms X was unhappy with the Council’s response but did not provide details of the outstanding issues and did not respond to the Council’s offer to meet her. Instead, she made a subject access request (SAR).
11. The Council was then contacted by Ofsted, who Ms X had also complained to. The Council responded to say it was satisfied no further safeguarding action was required. Ofsted later carried out an inspection of the school.
12. Since then, Ms X has raised other, related, matters with other Council officers which the Council do not consider to be complaints, but further requests for information. It has closed Ms X’s original complaint because she failed to respond to its queries on how to progress it.
13. We will not investigate this complaint. Ms X’s substantive complaint relates to the actions taken by the school and we cannot investigate what happens in schools. There is no evidence the Council acted with fault in how it made its decision to not take any safeguarding action over the matter.
14. Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s handling of her complaint but where we decide not to investigate the substantive matters we will not consider the Council’s complaints handling. This is because we do not consider this a good use of public resources.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because any fault has not caused injustice to her.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman