The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to respond to Mr X. That is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our investigating.
The complaint
Mr X complained that the Council had not confirmed what action it planned to take following the findings of an independent Social Care Review looking at the children’s social care system in England and a Police inspection. He said the Council was failing to protect its most vulnerable residents. He said he did not want other families to experience similar abuses to his own family.
Mr X is also unhappy with the Council’s decision to designate him a persistent complainant.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. 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 may decide not to continue with 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.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X has previously complained to the Ombudsman about the Council’s actions in relation to the support it provided his family; about the Police Fire and Crime Commissioner and about the Staffordshire Police and Crime Panel. We have issued final decisions on these complaints therefore will not consider any repeat concerns further.
Mr X complained further in April 2022 about the Council’s historical contact with his family and its current practices. The Council responded in May 2022. It did not uphold his complaint. It said it had worked with his daughter in accordance with the correct procedures in 2014. It said most of his complaints were about the Police, and it had no jurisdiction over the Police.
Mr X sent the Council several further emails including questions about how the Council intended to improve its practices following the findings of the wider Social Care Review. Mr X asked the Council to review its decision to make him a persistent complainant.
The Council responded in July 2022. It said it did not consider the information provided by Mr X raised new grounds for complaint. The Council also upheld its decision that Mr X was a persistent complainant. It said it had considered the history of his complaints and that he had sent these to multiple individuals. It said it had finite resources and could not continue to engage with him in the same manner. It said that Mr X could contact the Council further in six months to ask for a review of his status.
We will not investigate this complaint further. The Council has explained to Mr X the reasons he is a persistent complainant and that it will not continue to respond to him about complaints that it had previously dealt with. I am satisfied it has properly considered the additional information he has sent it and responded appropriately. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation. Additionally, there is no evidence the Council’s actions have caused Mr X a significant injustice.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman