Summary: Mr X complained about the Councils ongoing restriction of his contact with the Children’s Services Department. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. We will not investigate other issues raised as they have been considered within previous complaints.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council continuing to limit his contact with it over the conduct of its officers in relation to court proceedings relating to a non-molestation order, and to the contact arrangements that have been set up for contact with his children. He says the restrictions on his contact are unreasonable.

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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complained about restrictions placed on his contact with the Council since 2016. He is limited to a single point of contact with one officer and fortnightly updates. This was due to the excessive demands he was making on the Children’s Services Department in the past. Mr X has made previous complaints to the Ombudsman concerning these issues. In 2019 we considered the Council’s decision to place the restrictions on Mr X in case number 18012511. We did not uphold Mr X’s claim that they were unreasonable.
5. Since Mr X submitted his latest complaint the Council held a review on the restrictions in December 2019. It decided that his demands on the service had reduced sufficiently for it to remove the restrictions and has done so with a proviso that further unreasonable behaviour would require further review.
6. We will not investigate any of the issues raised previously by Mr X and the Council’s decision to remove the restrictions is a reasonable one. There is no evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. We will not investigate other issues raised as they have been considered within previous complaints.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman