Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s communication with her about her child’s education and welfare, its response to her report of safeguarding concerns and its failure to enforce a court order. There is insufficient evidence of fault and the courts are better placed to resolve any dispute about where Ms X’s child lives.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council did not appropriately communicate important information with her about her child’s education and welfare. It also did not act to enforce a Child Arrangement Order or respond appropriately to her report of safeguarding concerns.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
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 shares parental responsibility for her child, Y, with Y’s father, Mr Z. In 2016, the courts made a Child Arrangement Order setting out that Y would live with Ms X but spend time with Mr Z every other weekend. Mr Z lives in a different council area.
8. In September 2023, Y did not return home from a weekend in Mr Z’s care. Mr Z told the Council Y would be staying with him and he had applied for full custody of Y through the courts.
9. The Council advised both Ms X and Mr Z that as both parents had parental responsibility, any dispute about where Y lived needed to be decided by the courts.
10. Mr Z contacted Y’s school and said he wanted to remove Y from the school and enroll her at a school closer to his home. The school agreed it would take Y off its roll. Y’s school did not consult with Ms X or tell her about this decision.
11. Ms X reported safeguarding concerns to the Council about Y living with Mr Z.
12. The Council visited Y at Mr Z’s house. It spoke with Y and Mr Z. It was satisfied Mr Z was providing appropriate care for Y and it had no safeguarding concerns. As Mr Z lived in a different council area, it decided it had no further role and so closed the case.
13. In November 2023, the courts held a preliminary hearing to consider Y’s living arrangements but did not reach a decision. It scheduled a further hearing for 2024.
14. We will not investigate this complaint. Any dispute about where Y lives can only be resolved through the courts. Mr Z has started court action related to the Child Arrangement Order in place and it is for the courts to decide where Y should live and whether to amend the Order.
15. We cannot investigate the school’s actions following Mr Z’s request to remove Y from its school roll and its failure to communicate with Ms X about this decision. We have no power to investigate internal decisions taken by schools.
16. The Council appropriately considered Ms X’s concerns about Y living with Mr Z. It visited Y at Mr Z’s home to assess any safeguarding risks. It was satisfied Mr Z was providing appropriate care and it had no safeguarding concerns about Y living with him. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the court is better placed to consider any dispute about Y’s living arrangements, we cannot investigate the actions of Y’s school and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman