Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to consider Mr X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating. For the remainder, other bodies are better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council refused to consider his complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
2. Mr X also said the Council did not properly consider his concerns about the care provided to his child by their other parent.
3. Mr X said this caused distress.
4. Mr X wants the Council to consider his complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure, review its processes and apologise.

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 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X contacted the Council with concerns about his child’s welfare while in the care of their other parent.
10. The Council screened Mr X’s concerns and decided the child was not in need of services.
11. Mr X complained to the Council about its decision and asked it to consider his complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
12. The statutory basis for the children’s complaints procedure starts with section 26 of the Children Act 1989. The main points are:
• Councils must set up a procedure for considering complaints made to them by “any child who is being looked after by them or who is not being looked after by them but is in need”.
• Under that procedure, a council must consider a complaint from such a child about “the discharge … of any of their qualifying functions in relation to the child”.
• ‘Qualifying functions’ include, among other things, any action taken under Part 3 of the Act (which includes assessment and support delivered to children in need under section 17).
13. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. As the Council decided the child was not in need of services, his complaint does not meet the criteria to be considered under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. There is therefore not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to warrant us investigating.
14. Mr X also complained about the actions of his child’s other parent, which he regards as parental alienation. We will also not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. These matters are likely to need consideration by the court, and it is reasonable to expect Mr X to take the matter to court.
15. Mr X also complained the Council did not follow information sharing protocols by discussing the concerns he raised with the child’s other parent.
16. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) enforces data protection legislation. The main roles of the ICO are to uphold information rights in the public interest by promoting openness by public bodies and protecting the privacy of individuals.
17. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. The ICO is better placed to consider and decide complaints about data protection. This applies here.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating. For the remainder, court and the ICO are better placed to consider and decide the matters he raises.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman