The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a child and family assessment because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains that the Council was at fault in the production of a child and family assessment and in its response to his subsequent 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.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In 2020 the Council completed a child and family assessment in respect of Mr B’s son. Mr B argues that the social worker who carried out the assessment did so with bias against him and the report she produced was inaccurate.
Mr B says the assessment report was shared with the family court in the course of private law proceedings about his son’s care. He says the misleading nature of the assessment was material to the outcome of the proceedings. He says this resulted in huge emotional cost and substantial legal fees.
The Council responded to Mr B’s complaint under the statutory procedure for children’s services complaint. The complaint completed all three stages, and was upheld in part. The Council accepted the findings. Mr B does not believe the outcome is adequate. He wants disciplinary procedures followed and reimbursement for his legal costs.
The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so. The documents Mr B has provided show that his complaint was properly investigated under the statutory procedure and the conclusions appear reasonable and defensible. That being the case, it is not for the Ombudsman to reinvestigate the matter.
The Council has already accepted that there was fault in the way the assessment was written. The Ombudsman will not ask for an assessment to be altered retrospectively because it sets out the view officers took at the time it was written. The most we will normally seek to achieve in these circumstances is that a complainant’s contrary views are recorded. Mr B has complained and set out his views on the assessment, so this has already been done.
It is also the case that we cannot achieve the outcomes Mr B is seeking. By law we cannot consider matters or evidence considered in court. We cannot therefore consider the impact Mr B says the assessment had on the private legal case or attribute the injustice Mr B says he suffered to it. Neither does the law allow us to consider whether officers should be subject to disciplinary action.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman