Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s Child and Family Assessment. Mr X’s complaint about the content of the assessment is better suited to the Information Commissioner’s Office. Mr X’s complaint about contact with his children is better considered by a court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council:
1. failed to carry out a fair Child and Family Assessment (CAFA);
2. included factual inaccuracies within the assessment; and
3. failed to provide him with copies of relevant reports and did not give him opportunity to respond to concerns.
2. Mr X said these matters caused him significant distress. He wanted the Council to amend what he views as inaccurate, misleading and prejudicial information contained within its records and assessments; and remove any safety plans or restrictions relating to contact with his 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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. My assessment A significant part of Mr X’s complaint is about the accuracy of information recorded by the Council and his wish for the records and assessments to be amended. Mr X is therefore asking for a “right to rectification”.
7. Parliament created the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as the specialist body responsible for considering disputes about personal data and the accuracy of information held by public bodies. The ICO has specific powers and expertise to consider whether information should be corrected, amended or retained. It is therefore better placed than the Ombudsman to consider this aspect of Mr X’s complaint.
8. Mr X also said the content of the CAFA affected his relationship and contact with his children. Decisions about child contact and arrangements for children are matters for the courts. Where a person wishes to seek, establish, or vary arrangements for child contact the appropriate route is an application to the Family Court. The court is the body with the legal power to determine such matters and make orders where appropriate. The Ombudsman has no such power, and therefore it is reasonable for Mr X to submit an application to the court to obtain the outcome he seeks.
9. Mr X said the Council failed to share the CAFA with him and did not allow him the opportunity to comment on the report before decisions were made. However, based on the information seen Mr X was ultimately provided with a copy of the assessment and was able to submit his concerns to the Council in writing. There is insufficient remaining injustice to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman into this point.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there are other bodies better placed to consider these matters, an Ombudsman investigation would not achieve the outcomes sought by Mr X, and any remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman