The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council adopting a child protection plan, nor a social worker’s actions. Other bodies are better placed, and we are unlikely to find fault in the Council adopting a child protection conferences recommendations.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, says the Council should not have called a child protection conference and a social worker encouraged her to lie to a Court.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about action taken by or on behalf of any local policing body in connection with the investigation or prevention of crime. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, Section 26, paragraph 2 as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss X which included the Council’s response to her.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X says that she made up an allegation against her husband to get back at him. She called the Police who the Council say arrested him. The Police told the Council’s children services team as the allegation involved domestic abuse.
The Council decided to call an Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC). This was held in October 2022 and recommended the Council have a child protection plan.
Miss X says: the Council provided inaccurate and unfair information to the ICPC.
a Council social worker told her to lie to a court.
Analysis Following a referral, and an assessment by a social worker, a multi-agency strategy meeting may decide the concerns are substantiated and the child is likely to suffer significant harm. It then calls an ICPC.
The ICPC decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
After the ICPC, there will be one or more Review Child Protection Conferences to consider progress on action taken to safeguard the child and whether the Child Protection Plan should be maintained, amended, or discontinued.
Review Child Protection Conferences should be held within three months of the initial conference, and then at maximum intervals of six months.
The ICPC is a multi-agency body and is not in itself a body in the Ombudsman's jurisdiction. Parents usually attend them and have the opportunity to set out their views.
The ICPC plays an advisory role. But the final decision, for example whether to place a child on a Child Protection Plan or to discontinue a Plan, is the responsibility of the council. We would generally consider it suitable for a council to follow the recommendations of the ICPC unless there was good reason not to.
It is reasonable to expect Miss X to seek a review conference if she feels the ICPC was flawed.
Miss X has the right to ask records are ‘rectified’. This means the Council amends any factual errors in its records. If the Council refuses to do so, she can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Parliament set up the ICO to consider data protection disputes which includes ‘right to rectification’ disputes. The ICO are better placed than us to consider if the Council should change its records particularly because of complex exemptions for child protection case files.
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the allegation a social worker encouraged her to lie to a court. Any allegations of a person committing a criminal offence are for the Police to consider.
Our role is to investigate the actions of the Council as a corporate body, not to hold a single officer accountable. If Miss X has concerns about the professionalism or integrity of an individual social worker, it is reasonable to expect her to report her concerns to their professional body, Social Work England.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because other bodies are better placed. Also we are unlikely to find fault in a decision to adopt an ICPC’s recommendation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman