Summary: Mr X complains the Council discriminated against him and defamed his character when processing his application to become a local authority approved chaperone. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and how it processed his application.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council discriminated against him and defamed his character when processing his application to become a local authority approved chaperone.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint and the information he provided.
5. I considered the information I received from the Council in response to our initial enquiries.
6. Mr X and the Council were given the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered the comments received before making this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s Policy

7. The Council has a policy that all children and young people must be looked after either by their own parent or by a local authority approved chaperone whilst they are taking part in a performance.
8. A chaperone must show the same care a good parent would and cannot carry on another role at the same time. Main responsibilities include:
• Taking action if the child is ill, tired or upset
• Making sure the child has enough breaks, rest and meals
• Thinking about health and safety issues on set/stage
• Being aware of child protection issues
9. A chaperone may supervise up to 12 children/young people at a time but the Council can reduce this number if it thinks it necessary to do so.
10. Anyone aged 18 or over, living in the local authority’s area can apply to be registered as a chaperone with the Council.
11. To become a chaperone, there is an application form to complete, training sessions to attend, a fee to pay, a headshot photograph to submit and three types of identification are required.
12. Once the Council has checked the applicant’s identification, a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) disclosure form is required to be completed by the applicant.
13. Once the Council has received a satisfactory enhanced DBS disclosure, two satisfactory references and the applicant has attended the relevant training courses, the Council sends a confirmation of chaperone approval to the applicant and ID badge which may be valid for approximately up to three years.

The Equality Act

14. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
15. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
16. The ‘protected characteristics’ referred to in the Act are:

• age;
• disability;
• gender reassignment;
• marriage and civil partnership;
• pregnancy and maternity;
• race;
• religion or belief;
• sex; and
• sexual orientation.

17. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
18. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.

What happened

19. Mr X applied to the Council to renew his chaperoning approval. Due to the limited chaperoning opportunities during the COVID-19 pandemic, Mr X requested the Council reconsider its requirement for two referees. The Council agreed to Mr X’s request and advised him it would accept one referee.
20. On receipt of Mr X’s DBS check and reference, the Council decided not to extend his chaperone approval. Instead, it recommended he obtained further experience by working as part of a team of chaperones. The Council asked Mr X to contact it in advance of every chaperone job he secures to enable it to assess and provide approval on an individual basis for the specific production. The Council said this would enable Mr X to gain invaluable experience as a chaperone and also provide him with other referees that he will be able to nominate to provide references in the future.
21. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s decision that he chaperone as part of a team, he felt the Council had discriminated against him, defamed his good character and implied he is a risk to children.
22. The Council said it had not refused his chaperone approval at any point and the conditions it put in place were appropriate and reasonable. The action taken by the Council was not to cause upset or discriminate but to ensure all legal requirements were followed and appropriate actions, if required, were put in place for those working with children.
23. Mr X escalated his complaint. The Council explained in its response that Mr X had not disclosed what was recorded on his DBS check but despite this, the Council supported him through the process by deciding to grant his chaperone licence with restrictions. The Council was of the view the decision regarding his chaperone application was in line with the relevant processes and procedures.
24. Mr X remained unhappy with the Council’s decision and brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

25. Mr X said he felt discriminated against by the Council’s decision to impose a condition on his chaperoning approval that he work as part of a team. However, considering the provisions of the Equality Act 2010, the Council’s decision is not discriminatory.
26. I have reviewed Mr X’s application and found he had stated he did not have any criminal convictions. I have reviewed Mr X’s DBS disclosure certificate that shows he has a criminal conviction. Mr X says the conviction was from over ten years ago and it has not been an issue elsewhere when applying for work. Although the conviction was from a long time ago, this does not mean it does not exist. It would be inappropriate for the Council to ignore such information, no matter how old it is.
27. The evidence shows the Council has made its decision after considering Mr X’s application, DBS disclosure certificate and reference from his referee. The evidence also shows that instead of refusing Mr X’s approval, it has worked with him to ensure he satisfies their requirements in the future. The Council has advised Mr X that once he has gained further experience within a team of chaperones and it has obtained the required satisfactory references, it will be in a position to review his approval again.
28. Although Mr X is unhappy with the decision, it was a decision the Council was entitled to make and there is no evidence of fault in the way it was made. We cannot therefore comment on the merits of the decision the Council made.

Back to top

Final decision

29. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided Mr X’s application. I have completed my investigation and closed this complaint.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman