The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of a social worker, because there is not enough injustice to warrant an investigation. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints about the Council sharing inaccurate information as part of the Child Protection process as these matters are best considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office.
The complaint
Mr X complains the social worker working with his family acted unprofessionally. He also complains about inaccurate information in Child Protection reports.
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 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 continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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
Mr X complains about how the social worker behaved in meetings. The Council said it had spoken to other professionals at the meetings, who did not raise concerns. It apologised for any distress caused by the worker challenging Mr X and his wife’s decisions.
Mr X appealed the decision of the Child Protection Conference. He said the meetings were not run properly. He said the social worker should have circulated a Speech and Learning Therapy and a Social Emotional and Mental Health assessment prior to the meeting. It should have considered these reports which provided important contextual information. The Council agreed. It held a fresh child protection conference and agreed that it would not continue with the Child Protection Plan.
Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter. I consider any injustice is not significant enough to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.
Mr X complains reports shared by Child Protection professionals included inaccurate information. Complaints about such matters are best considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice to investigate the social worker’s conduct. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to raise concerns about data matters with the ICO.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman