The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of a social worker and what the Council recorded about Miss X when her contract as a foster carer ended. The complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now. Even if that were not so, Miss X’s complaint of factual inaccuracy in records is one about which she could approach the Information Commissioner’s Office. And any matter of greater compensation for the social worker’s action would be more appropriate for a court.
The complaint
Ms X said a social worker breached her confidentiality by allowing a child to use her own mobile phone. She also said the Council included inaccurate information in her termination to approve letter and failed to offer her adequate support and training. She said the Council did not consider her full complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) 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: we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The events concerned mostly happened in 2018. The termination of Miss X’s foster carer status was in mid-2019. We have discretion to consider matters more than 12 months old, but we will usually only do so where the person complaining has been unaware of a matter or unable to complain about it until recently. Miss X was aware of her termination as a foster carer more than three years before she approached us, and we have seen no evidence that she was prevented from complaining at the time.
Even if the complaint were not late, Miss X also has or had a right to approach the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about the accuracy of the statements made in the Council’s letter. And any desire for greater compensation than the symbolic amount offered by the Council for the social worker allowing the child to use a personal mobile phone would be more appropriate for a court to consider.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to consider it now.
Even if that were not so, Miss X has or had a right to approach the ICO about the accuracy of statements in a letter, and compensation would be a matter more appropriate for a court than the Ombudsman.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman