Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of matters involving her children and its decision to restrict her contact with the Council. One part of the complaint is late without good enough reason for us to accept it now. The Council is still dealing with another part. The remaining part has not caused Miss X significant enough injustice to justify us investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Council has failed to safeguard her children over the past 11 years and has left them in unsafe living circumstances. She says that, more recently, one of her children became homeless and the Council has failed to secure accommodation for them. Miss X also complains about the Council’s decision to restrict her contact with the Council.
2. Miss X says the Council’s actions have caused her distress. She wants the Council to apologise and take responsibility for its failings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her children’s case for the last 11 years. This part of Miss X’s complaint is late.
9. As paragraph 4 says, we do not investigate late complaints unless there are good reasons to do so. Given the time that has passed, and the changes in situations of the parties, it is unlikely that an investigation by us could establish clearly enough what happened and when over such a long period, or the effects of any alleged fault. It is not our role to carry out an overall review of Miss X’s children’s case, and Miss X could have complained to us sooner. Therefore, I see no good reason to investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint.

Children’s homelessness

10. Miss X complains the Council has recently failed to safeguard one of her children who has become homeless.
11. The evidence I have seen shows this part of Miss X’s complaint is still going through the Council’s complaint procedure. As paragraph 5 says, we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless the organisation has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to complete every stage of the complaint procedure stage of the complaint procedure before bringing this complaint back to us if she remains dissatisfied. If Miss X returns to us with this part of the complaint, we will need evidence of her child’s consent, given the child’s age.

Contact restrictions

12. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to restrict her contact with it. She says the Council did not follow its rules and the Council’s actions contributed to the circumstances where it restricted her contact.
13. The Council’s policy allows it to restrict contact where someone’s behaviour is abusive or threatening. The policy says the Council must issue a warning before restricting contact.
14. The evidence I have seen shows the Council restricted Miss X’s contact after it decided she had been threatening and abusive towards staff. It did not issue a warning before doing this. The Council has apologised for this error and has raised this with the relevant team. However, it also decided the restrictions were suitable in the circumstances.
15. While I accept the Council did not follow its procedure when restricting Miss X’s contact, I do not consider this has caused her significant enough injustice to justify us investigating. The Council’s reasons for restricting contact are consistent with its policy. Miss X can still contact the Council and raise concerns within the limits of the restrictions. Further investigation by us is unlikely to achieve more than the Council has already done. Therefore, I will not investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because one part is late without good enough reason to accept it now, the Council is still dealing with one part and the other part has not caused her significant enough injustice to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman