The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s conduct in the course of child protection action. This is because our intervention would not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss B, complains that the Council was at fault in the course of child protection action, and in its response to her complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss B and her children were the subject of a Section 47 child protection enquiry which led to the children being made subject to a child protection plan. Miss B complains that the social worker was at fault in interviewing her son without her knowledge and in making unnecessary disclosures to him, which have had and negative impact on their relationship.
Miss B further complains that the social worker failed to keep her properly informed throughout the enquiry and that she gave inaccurate information to the child protection conference, leading to an unreasonable decision to make the children subject to child protection plans. She says the Council’s failure to support her as the victim of an abusive relationship caused unnecessary stress during her pregnancy and had a negative impact on her ability to co-parent with her son’s father.
Miss B’s complaint has completed the Council’s corporate complaints procedure and has been upheld in part. Miss B does not believe the findings of the investigation, or the Council’s apology and the financial remedy it has offered, adequately reflect the Council’s fault or the significant emotional impact it has had.
The question for us is whether it is likely we could add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out. In this regard, I note that significant aspects of the complaint, including those around the initial interview with Miss B’s son, have been upheld and there is therefore nothing further for the Ombudsman to consider. I understand that Miss B regards the remedy the Council offered as inadequate. But it is not wholly disproportionate in the circumstances of the case, so there are insufficient grounds for us to intervene.
Turning to those aspects of the complaint which were not upheld, the Council’s findings are reasonable and proportionate, and there is nothing to suggest fault in the way it reached them. In the absence of evidence of fault, it is not for the Ombudsman to reinvestigate the matters, or to impose an alternative view.
For the reasons set out above, investigation by the Ombudsman would not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out and our intervention is not warranted.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because we would not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman