Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her children’s case. Miss X has used her alternative remedy to the court on some matters. There is not enough evidence of fault on other matters.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her children’s case since 2023, including:
• failures to provide support and meet expenses in line with a court order; and
• failures to respond to her complaints and contacts.
2. She says the Council’s failures have caused her financial and emotional hardship. She wants the Council to admit its failings, apologise and provide her financial redress so she can recover. She also wants the Council to fund further therapy and support planning with professionals to ensure contact with her children.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (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
5. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Between 2023 and 2025, Miss X and the Council were parties to care proceedings involving her children. Miss X had legal representation during these proceedings. Therefore, it would have been reasonable for her to raise any concerns about the handling of those proceedings through her legal representation at that time.
9. After care proceedings ended, Miss X complained to the Council about several failings in the handling of her case, including that the Council failed to provide support and meet expenses in line with a court order. She later commenced court proceedings against the Council for this, which the court considered and dismissed.
10. As Miss X has taken these matters to court, the law prevents us from investigating it. This applies even though the court dismissed her claim and signposted to us.

Contact and complaint handling

11. The evidence I have seen shows the Council:
• implemented contact restrictions to manage the high volume of emails and correspondence from Miss X; and
• was unable to consider some of Miss X’s complaints while she initiated court proceedings against it.
12. Following the outcome of the court proceedings, the Council completed its stage two investigation and provided its response to Miss X.
13. There is not enough evidence of fault on this point and I am satisfied the Council responded appropriately to Miss X’s complaints and contacts. If she is dissatisfied with the Council’s stage two response she can escalate this to stage three.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because she has used her alternative remedy to the court on some matters. On other matters there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman