Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s children’s services, because the Council has already provided a suitable resolution, and further investigation is unlikely to achieve anything more. Other matters fall outside our jurisdiction and should be raised in Court or with another body.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the actions of the Council in relation to her great grandchild. She says the Council Social Worker breached a court order, acted with bias, ignored safeguarding concerns, and tried to force her into an unnecessary Child in Need Plan. She also complains the Council failed to follow the correct complaints process. Mrs X wants an apology and policy changes as well as more robust oversight of newly qualified social workers.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
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: there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

6. Mrs X complained that her great grandchild’s Social Worker wrote a contradictory Section 7 report for the court, dismissed a safeguarding incident, and pressured her to allow unsupervised contact. She accused the social worker of bias, intimidation, breaching the Child Arrangements Order (CAO), and using inaccurate information. Mrs X asked the Council to investigate and appoint a new Social Worker.
7. The Council said the report relied on available information and the court decides its weight. It accepted the Social Worker’s tone could have been better but denied any fault, intimidation or bias. It agreed to allocate a new Social Worker.
8. Mrs X asked to escalate her complaint, further questioning why a newly qualified Social Worker breached the CAO twice and why a manager approved this without checks. She asked for assurance of lessons learned and wider service improvements.
9. The Council considered Mrs X’s complaint at stage one of its corporate complaints process. It acknowledged that standards were not met and accepted the Social Worker breached the CAO and failed to follow due process. The Council apologised and confirmed it had taken action, including reflective supervision, additional training, improved managerial oversight, and a review of relevant processes. It explained that only the court can make changes to a CAO.
10. Mrs X asked to escalate her complaint further, as she said the response lacked independence and cited the statutory children’s complaints procedure requiring an independent person to consider the complaint.
11. The Council explained it considered Mrs X’s complaint under its corporate complaint’s procedure instead of the statutory children’s complaints process as the complaint focused on compliance with a CAO and professional practice, not on statutory children’s services. A manager who had not been involved reviewed the stage two response and upheld the stage one findings. The Council repeated its apology, and confirmed the actions taken to address the issues.
12. We cannot investigate any matters relating to care and contact arrangements or Section 7 report content, because these form part of court proceedings. The law prevents us from investigating these matters, and any allegations of bias or unfairness must be raised in court.
13. We also cannot investigate the conduct of the Council’s Social Worker. Our role is to look into the Council’s actions as a corporate body, rather than to investigate any individual. If Mrs X continues to have concerns about the conduct of the Social Worker, she can report these to their professional body, Social Work England. 
14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the Council has already addressed her concerns, apologised and made changes. Further investigation by us would unlikely achieve anything more. The Councils decision to treat the complaint as corporate rather than statutory appears justified given the nature of the issues raised. The Council is entitled to offer to support Mrs X’s great grandchild via a Child in Need Plan based on its professional judgement and assessment of the situation, despite Mrs X’s objections and her right to decline. Other matters are either for the courts to consider or the professional regulator.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the Council has already provided a suitable resolution, and further investigation is unlikely to achieve anything more. Other matters fall outside our jurisdiction and should be raised in Court or with another body.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman