Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with Mr X and child in need matters involving his children. The Council has already investigated and responded to Mr X’s concerns under all three stages of the statutory complaint procedure. It has apologised and offered remedial action and payment for the injustice caused by the faults identified. We could not add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. R X complains about the Council’s mishandling of his children’s case and its failure to safeguard them from his ex-partner, who has a history of violent convictions and abuse against Mr X. Mr X alleges the Council has acted in a biased way against him and lacked independence when it investigated his complaints at stages two and three. Mr X believes the Council’s action has harmed his parental rights and relationship with his children. He wants the Council to

• apologise;
• help rebuild his relationship with his children;
• provide financial compensation;
• review its case handling;
• provide further staff training; and,
• disclose data missing following his previous Subject Access Request under the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The statutory children’s complaints procedure was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with access to an independent, thorough and prompt response to their concerns. Because of this, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it.
6. However, we may look at whether there were any flaws in the stage two investigation or stage three review panel that could call the findings into question.
7. The Council concluded its consideration of Mr X’s complaints under stage three of the statutory complaint process in January 2025. This included the complaint elements summarised in paragraph 1 above and other issues.
8. The stage three review panel partially upheld one of Mr X’s complaints about the frequency of updates from the Social Worker allocated to his children’s case. The Council’s final response to Mr X following the review panel rejected its finding on this point as it found there had been no breach in practice standards. The Council offered several methods by which it could help Mr X with rebuilding his relationship with his children. It also apologised for delays in progressing Mr X’s stage three complaint and offered a remedy payment of £300 in recognition of the injustice this delay caused.
9. While councils are entitled to reject the findings of stage two and three complaint investigations, the Ombudsman’s position is that such findings should stand.
10. Further investigation of Mr X’s complaints by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add to the Council’s responses. The Council’s responses to Mr X’s complaints under all three stages of the statutory process were detailed and thorough. The remedial action the Council has offered to Mr X is in line with the recommendations we would typically make in such cases.
11. We cannot investigate any concerns Mr X has about how the Council has responded to his request for personal data under GDPR. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is the organisation responsible for dealing with these matters.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation could not provide add to the Council’s responses.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman