Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint because his objection to the company the Council proposed to carry out an independent investigation does not justify an investigation by us.

The complaint

1. Mr F complained about the Council’s dealings with his children.
2. The Council responded at the first stage of the statutory children’s complaints process. Mr F was unhappy with the Council’s response.
3. The Council offered to appoint an investigator and independent person to consider his complaint at the second stage of the process.
4. Mr F objected to the Council’s plans to use an external company to undertake the investigation. He complained to us.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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 do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• the alleged fault does not justify investigation, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to let the council respond.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr F and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The statutory children’s complaints process is a formal procedure, set out in law, which councils must follow to investigate certain types of complaint. It involves:
• a written response from the Council (Stage 1)
• the appointment of an investigator and independent person to prepare a report (Stage 2) and, if the person making the complaint requests,
• an independent panel to consider their representations (Stage 3).
9. Regulations and guidance set out the procedure for the process.
10. Mr F’s complaint is eligible for this procedure.
11. We expect people to complete this procedure before we will consider their complaint.
12. The Council was willing to appoint an investigator and independent person.
13. Mr F told the Council he did not accept the arrangements the Council proposed. He objected to the company the Council intended to use to carry out the investigation.
14. Mr F’s objection to the company does not justify investigation by us.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint because his objection to the company the Council proposed to carry out an independent investigation does not justify an investigation by us.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman