Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refer Miss X to the Local Authority Designated Officer after it received a safeguarding referral for Miss X. The Council has agreed to pay Miss X £300 for the avoidable distress its actions caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council did not follow the correct procedures after it received a safeguarding referral about her. She said that resulted in the Council incorrectly referring her to the Local Authority Designated Officer (the LADO). She said the Council’s actions have caused her significant distress. She said it has damaged her reputation as a social worker and that personal information has been shared about her unnecessarily. She wants financial compensation from the Council for its actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The hospital made a safeguarding referral to the Council about Miss X. That was because her ex-partner had attended the hospital and he was identified as being a high-risk perpetrator of domestic violence.
6. The Council held a strategy meeting to discuss the safeguarding concerns. It decided to complete a section 47 assessment of Miss X. The strategy meeting also made an action to refer Miss X to the LADO. The LADO held a meeting resulting in a further action to refer Miss X to Social Work England
7. In the Council’s complaint response to Miss X, it said that the decision to refer her to the LADO was flawed. It accepted the strategy meeting lost sight of Miss X as a parent and a survivor of domestic abuse and instead focused on the fact Miss X was a social worker. It acknowledged Miss X was not working as a social worker at the time of the referral and that the threshold for a LADO investigation was not met. It said the Council should not have held the LADO meeting. The Council confirmed it did not make a referral to Social Work England.
8. The Council said it had since strengthened its LADO arrangements. It also apologised to Miss X for failing to follow the correct procedures and the impact that had on her emotional wellbeing. It said Miss X’s LADO file stated the allegation was unsubstantiated and that she could continue to work in children’s workforce.
9. We will not investigate this complaint further. The Council has made service improvements. In response to our enquiries, the Council has agreed to pay Miss X £300 for the avoidable distress caused by its actions. That is in line with our Guidance on Remedies.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we are satisfied with the action the Council has agreed to take to remedy the outstanding injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman