Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council did not check its records to confirm if Mr X had parental responsibility, failed to consult him when undertaking assessments and failed to safeguard his child. This is because it is unlikely an investigation would add to the Council’s response, there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation, and it is unlikely we will find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to use its records to confirm that he had parental responsibility. As a result, it failed to consult him when assessing his child. He says the Council did not properly consider his concerns about third parties and as a result his child was not safeguarded.
2. He also says a third-party told him the Council held incorrect information about him.
3. He says it has ruined his relationship with his child and he feels he has not been heard.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation, or
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council failed to confirm that Mr X had parental responsibility, and he was therefore not contacted when the Council carried out an assessment for his child.
8. The Council has apologised for this error, given Mr X the opportunity to contribute to the assessment and taken steps to ensure it does not happen again.
9. The Council has also explained it did not hold the incorrect information in its records Mr X complained about.
10. I consider it unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would add to this response. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation of this matter.
11. Mr X also complains the Council did not properly consider his concerns about third parties and safeguard his child. The Council’s records show that it followed correct processes when making safeguarding decisions about Mr X’s child and ensured a safety plan was in place. The Council said the child has not come to the attention of children’s social work since their case was closed.
12. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
13. I understand Mr X was not consulted when these decisions were made. But as the Council properly considered the concerns about Mr X’s child, I consider it unlikely consulting him would have resulted in any further action or have impacted the outcome. Any injustice is therefore not significant enough to justify our investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely an investigation would add to the Council’s response, there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation, and it is unlikely we will find fault.

Investigators decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman