Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS)

4. Mr A complains about Cafcass. His specific complaints are:

• That a spurious and defamatory safeguarding referral was made against him and that Cafcass did not follow its own safeguarding policy to ensure his grandson (the child at the centre of proceedings) is protected. He says Cafcass did a quick assessment and took no further action, however this referral has been used in court to sway opinion.

• The Family Court Advisor (FCA) used third party false information/allegations and lies in court documents about him attending his grandson’s swimming lessons. He says this can be seen by the judge and could sway opinion.

5. Mr A says the safeguarding referral has been damaging to his mental health and wellbeing. He says it made him question his association with local friends and associates and felt like he and who he was associating with was being watched. He says the false allegations have also affected his mental health and he feels like has been utilised as a weapon of harm in proceedings, particularly with the undertones of the allegation.

6. As an outcome to his complaint, Mr A is seeking:

• Cafcass to resend letters that were sent to all parties without any mention of him and the false allegations made • The FCA’s position statement dated 12 March 2024 to be amended removing any references to himself • For the safeguarding referral to be revisited to ensure the allegation is not malicious or being used unfairly • Cafcass review its own adherence to its policies • An apology

7. Mr A’s daughter has been involved with the family court for a number of years. Her son, and therefore Mr A’s grandson, is the child at the centre of the proceedings. Mr A is not a party to the proceedings.

8. On 14 February 2024, Mr A submitted a Subject Access Request in which he requested to see the full record regarding the safeguarding referral. Cafcass responded to this on 18 March 2024 providing the information he was entitled to see. Mr A raised his complaint with Cafcass about this matter the same day. On 2 April 2024 Cafcass provided its final response.

9. On 20 February 2024, Mr A raised his second complaint with Cafcass about the false information about him. On 13 March 2024 Cafcass provided its final response. Mr A then brought both complaints to us for consideration.

Safeguarding referral

12. Before we decide if we should conduct a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not found any indications that something has gone wrong.

13. Mr A complains about a safeguarding referral made against him. He says Cafcass did not follow its own safeguarding process when considering this referral. He says it did a quick assessment and took no further action. However, he says this referral was submitted to court and has been used to sway opinion.

14. In its response dated 30 March 2024, Cafcass says:

‘I believe you to be misinformed [Mr A], or that you have misunderstood. For clarity, as previously advised by [named person] when completing the Subject Access request paperwork and my email both sent to you on 18 March 2024, there has been no safeguarding referral made in relation to yourself.

Concerns were raised about a non family member which were assessed and found not appropriate for further action. I am not at liberty to discuss this matter further’

15. Mr A says that a safeguarding concern was raised about him in an email dated 27 October 2023. Mr A has provided a copy of this email. The email refers to a friend of the maternal family who had been convicted some years earlier and part of the sentence passed was that they would be included on the Sex Offenders Register. The email asks whether this person is a friend of the maternal family and whether they have any contact with Mr A’s grandson. Mr A is not specifically named in this email.

16. Mr A has also provided his response to the email dated 29 October 2023 in which he has confirmed that the person in question is not a family friend and neither his daughter nor his grandson had ever met them.

17. In its final response dated 2 April 2024, Cafcass has answered Mr A’s specific questions about why it did not follow its own process and what quick assessment it did to reach its conclusion. It explained that it did follow its policy and it used professional judgement to thoroughly assess the matter.

18. Mr A is not party to the court proceedings. In its response to his Subject Access Request on 18 March 2024 Cafcass says ‘For non-parties: Please be aware you are a non-party in the proceedings of [named case]. Cafcass processes data due to its role within the family court proceedings. We are constrained in our processing by Family Procedure Rules, which means that Cafcass cannot share any data relating to proceedings with non-parties. You may make an application directly to court for them to assess’.

19. The Ombudsman’s Principles of Good Administration says ‘Public administration should be handled as openly as the law allows. Public bodies should give people information and, if appropriate, advice that is clear, accurate, complete, relevant and timely’.

20. As a non-party to proceedings, Mr A is not entitled to receive information about the case. We are satisfied that Cafcass has provided as much information about the safeguarding referral to him as it can and it has explained to him how he can access the information, by way of application to court. We understand why Mr A is concerned, particularly given the nature of the concern raised with Cafcass. We cannot say from the evidence we have seen that the referral was about him specifically as he is not named in the email, it says ‘maternal family’. As such we are satisfied that Cafcass has provided a sufficient response to his concerns and this is in line with our principles quoted above. We cannot comment on how this information was used in court as it for the judge to consider its relevance to proceedings.

False information

21. Mr A complains about the FCA using false information from a third party in their position statement dated 12 March 2024, and by doing so knowingly lied in court papers. This is in relation to the allegation that Mr A attended his grandson’s swimming lessons. Mr A says the FCA said the allegation had come from his grandson’s school. With his complaint to Cafcass, Mr A provided evidence from the school that it had not made the allegation.

22. In its response dated 13 March 2024, Cafcass says:

‘I can confirm that the information in the letter to [daughter], written by [named FCA], did not come from the school. [named FCA] was informed that this had happened by one of the parties and therefore this becomes someone’s opinion. Disputed matters of opinion need to be challenged by parties in court. I am afraid that I cannot divulge further information as you are not party to these proceedings. However, as the letter is already in your possessions, I would refer you to the sources of information as ascribed by [named FCA]…

[named FCA] has correctly advised [daughter] in his letter why he is supporting a form of action going forward and for that reason also this line will not be redacted and an apology is not deemed appropriate. This matter requires the adjudication of the court. I understand that you will feel this is not good enough as you will be frustrated but the court is the only place to deal with this matter’

23. Cafcass’ complaints policy outlines what it can and cannot consider as part of its complaints process. It says it cannot look into complaints that are:

‘Challenges to our assessments or recommendations to court. We undertake assessments as directed by the court and, ultimately, our reports are written for the court. We know that families will not always agree with our assessments or the recommendations we make. Where this happens, it is important that the court is aware of any disagreements with the content of a Cafcass report… Where a complaint is made about our assessment or recommendations we will provide information about how to challenge this appropriately.’

24. We have seen the position statement written by the FCA and it says that a party to the proceedings ‘states that the school have said that the maternal grandfather has been seen twice at [grandson’s] swimming session.

25. In our view this is not the FCA stating this as a fact, but as information provided to them and is therefore someone’s opinion. The only way to challenge this is through the court. We also cannot say what effect this could have on a judge’s decision. As explained previously, it is up to the judge to decide the relevance of the information provided to the court. This is in line with Cafcass’ complaints policy.

26. We understand Mr A’s concern with both issues he has brought to us. His daughter and grandson have been going through these proceedings for a number of years, and so we understand his strength of feeling that these issues could affect the judge’s decision. While this is not something that we are able to comment upon, we hope that Mr A is reassured by our independent consideration of his concerns.

1. We have carefully considered Mr A’s complaint about Cafcass. We have seen no indication that anything went wrong.

2. It is our decision that Cafcass has provided Mr A with as much information as it can in relation to the safeguarding referral. We understand that this is frustrating for Mr A as he feels it is a referral against him.

3. We find that Cafcass is unable to amend a report to the court on the basis that Mr A disagrees with some of its contents. We understand his concern that the report contains inaccurate information about him. The only way to challenge this is in court.