The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s role in finding Mr X and his mother, Mrs Y, new accommodation. The Council is not providing the accommodation. We cannot consider complaints about landlords, which should be directed to the Housing Ombudsman instead. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant investigation of its actions, which are peripheral to the substantive complaint.
The complaint
Mrs Y complained the Council has refused to change her son’s (Mr X’s) social worker despite requests from him and his advocate. It has refused to move him, it has wrongly shared information with his father and the social worker ignores their contact and is unprofessional in meetings. The issues have impacted Mr X’s and Mrs Y’s physical and mental health. They want the Council to change Mr X’s social worker, apologise and compensate him.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as housing providers. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34A, 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: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or there is another body better placed to consider the complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council is not responsible for moving Mr X and Mrs Y, because their accommodation is provided by a separate housing provider. We cannot consider complaints about landlords, and the substantive complaint is about Mr X and Mrs Y’s wish to move. It is open to Mr X and Mrs Y to contact the Housing Ombudsman about their housing provider not having moved them yet.
I have considered Mr X and Mrs Y’s complaint about Mr X’s social worker not responding to contact and being unprofessional in meetings. I have seen the Council’s contact record. While it is evident Mrs Y would have liked more contact with the social worker, the Council’s actions do not amount to fault. It has had regular and proportionate contact with Mrs Y, and we do not require councils to have excessive contact with family members where the circumstances do not warrant it. I could not come to any sound conclusions about the conduct of the social worker in meetings, because I was not present and a view about the worker’s professionalism would be subjective.
There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in these respects to warrant investigation. The Council considered Mrs Y’s request for a new social worker, but decided not to change the worker for reasons it has explained to her. In the absence of fault in how the Council came to that decision, it is not for the Ombudsman to criticise it.
The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider complaints about the Council’s information-sharing practices. In the absence of a wider complaint that we propose to investigate, there is not a good reason for us to consider this part of their complaint instead of the Information Commissioner.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X and Mrs Y’s complaint because the substantive complaint is for the Housing Ombudsman, and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the other peripheral complaints. The Information Commissioner is best placed to consider complaints about information-sharing.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman