Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged failings by the Council with respect to the provision of child social support, its formal assessments, or compliance with data protection legislation. This is because the complainant’s complaint has yet to complete all three stages of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. Further, he could reasonably complain to the Information Commissioner about issues of non-compliance with data protection legislation.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr Q) has cared for his grandson (Child X) since mid-2023 following the death of his daughter and Child X’s mother. The Council is supportive of Mr Q making an application for a special guardianship order which will give his parental responsibility for Child X. Mr Q complains about alleged failings by the Council with respect to the provision of support to both his and Child X and its social work assessments. In particular, she says the reports completed following these assessments contain inaccurate information.
2. In addition, Mr Q alleges fault by the Council relating to delays in responding to his complaints about the above issues, as well not providing his information and documents despite making requests for these under data protection legislation.
3. In summary, Mr Q says the alleged failings are causing a significant and adverse impact on his life and Child X’s lives. As a desired outcome, she wants the Council to accept it has parental responsibility for Child X and to support him on that basis. Mr Q also wants the Council to provide copies of information she says are being withheld following his data requests.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether this 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 an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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. This is referred to as the statutory children’s complaints procedure which was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with an independent, thorough and prompt response to their concerns.
8. Because of this, we expect complainant’s to have completed all three stages of the statutory children’s complaints procedure with the council before referring any complaint to the Ombudsman. Further, where a complaint has been investigated under the full statutory children’s complaints procedure, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it. This is because an Independent Person has overseen S2 Investigation and S3 Panel Review. However, we may consider a council’s stage two investigation (S2 Investigation) and stage three panel review (S3 Panel Review) review to assess whether there were any flaws in these parts of the process that could call the findings into question.
9. I have considered Mr Q’s complaint to the Ombudsman, but note the complaint has not yet completed all stages of the statutory complaints procedure. The Council completed its Stage 2 Investigation in August 2024 and invited Mr Q to request a S3 Panel Review should she be disagree with the outcome. Before we make any decision whether to investigate Mr Q’s complaint, we expect him to request a S3 Panel Review and complete the remaining stage of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. If Mr Q remains dissatisfied following the S3 Panel Review, he may make a new complaint to us on that basis.
10. I note the Council’s S2 Investigation has found there has been delays completing stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. However, the S2 Investigation report recommends an apology and financial payment be made to Mr Q in recognition of this and the impact the delay had. In my view, this is a suitable remedy and, on this issue alone, further investigation by the Ombudsman would unlikely to lead to different outcome.
11. I also note part of Mr Q’s complaint concerns the Council not complying with his legal requests for personal information under data protection legislation. We normally expect someone to refer a matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. This body regulates compliance with data protection legislation and is the most appropriate body to consider such matters. Thise are no good reasons in my view that we should investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because Mr Q’s complaint has yet to complete all three stages of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. Further, Mr Q could reasonably complain to the Information Commissioner about the issues of non-compliance with data protection legislation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman