Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has demonstrated discriminatory and transphobic behaviour. This is because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss B, complains that the Council has repeatedly demonstrated discriminatory and transphobic behaviour towards her and her transgender child.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 may decide not to start an investigation if 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss B’s child is educated at home. Miss B says that, as a result of a failure to communicate on the part of the Council, she was contacted by the Council’s Education Welfare Officer. This contact was not subsequently followed up. Miss B says she was concerned by what she regarded as a threat to send her child back into a school setting.
6. Miss B further complains that a Council officer repeatedly used her child’s legal name, rather than chosen name, in correspondence. She regards this as amounting to transphobia. She wants the Council to acknowledge that its behaviour has been discriminatory and transphobic. She wants there to be repercussions for the officer she has named and wants an apology from her.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because we would achieve nothing significant by doing so. The Council has acknowledged that a delay in sharing information between departments led to the contact from the Education Welfare Officer, and that staff absence led to the subsequent lack of contact. The Council’s investigating officer has set out reasonable recommendations to address these issues and further investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add anything significant.
8. The Council has apologised for the repeated use of the child’s legal name. Again, the investigating officer’s recommendations are reasonable and proportionate. The Ombudsman’s intervention is not warranted. We considers complaint against councils as corporate bodies, not individual officers, and we cannot recommend action relating to the named officer, as Miss B is seeking.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman