Summary: We have upheld this complaint about services provided by the Council’s children and adolescent services. The Council has examined Mr X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure and agreed to offer Mr X a remedy in line with the panel’s recommendations. We will not investigate whether the Council defamed Mr X, as such matters can only be decided in court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council was inappropriate in how it communicated to, and about, his family. Mr X says this has destroyed his family. Mr X wants the Council to recognise and remedy its faults.
2. Mr X also says the Council has defamed his character.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
5. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. 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 procedure, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it. There are no reasons to do so here.
9. The statutory children’s complaints procedure has three stages. At stage two of the procedure, the Council offered Mr X a financial remedy for the faults identified. The stage three panel recommended the Council offer a further financial remedy to Mr X.
10. The Council has agreed to an extra remedy in line with our guidelines, which removes the need for us to investigate the delay.
11. We are unlikely to be able to determine Mr X’s claimed injustices of defamation. Defamation is a legal matter decided in the courts, and I see no reason why Mr X could not take legal action.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We have upheld this complaint. The Council has agreed to provide further proportionate remedy, complying with the recommendations of the statutory children’s complaints procedure stage three panel. If Mr X wishes to pursue a remedy for defamation, it is reasonable for him to take court action.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman