Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS)

3. Mr Z complains a Cafcass Family Court Adviser did not consider all the evidence he provided when preparing a safeguarding letter in September 2024. Mr Z says the Family Court Adviser should have looked at his written response to the claims his ex-wife (Mrs Z) made.

4. Mr Z also complains the Family Court Adviser told the family court he should not be allowed to contact his children due to the potential risk of sexual harm. Mr Z says no such allegations against him existed.

5. Mr Z says the Family Court Adviser’s actions have caused him immense anxiety, depression and stress. He says his mental health has still not recovered. Mr Z also says he missed several days’ work and had to pay several thousand pounds in additional legal fees.

6. As an outcome to his complaint, Mr Z would like service improvements to stop the same thing happening again. He would also like Cafcass to apologise to him and pay a financial remedy for the emotional impact and financial loss.

7. A family court was deciding custody arrangements for Mr and Mrs Z’s children following their separation. As part of this process, Cafcass provided advice to the court in the form of a safeguarding letter. This letter informs the court of any immediate risks to a child before the first hearing.

10. Before we decide if we should conduct a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not found any indications something has gone wrong.

Cafcass’s consideration of Mr Z’s evidence

11. Mr Z says Cafcass’s safeguarding letter for the family court did not fully represent his experience. He says the Family Court Adviser should have considered his written response to safeguarding concerns when writing the letter.

12. When preparing the letter, the Family Court Adviser should have followed Practice Direction 12B. This says Cafcass’s role is to gather relevant evidence and make safeguarding checks. It should do so by seeking information from local authorities and the police. The individuals will also provide information about safeguarding.

13. In making these safeguarding checks, Cafcass does not verify how accurate statements are, or make findings of fact. Cafcass will not invite individuals to respond to the others’ issues at this stage. Hearing disputes like this is done solely by the family court judge.

14. The safeguarding letter shows the Family Court Adviser considered several sources of information when preparing their safeguarding letter. This included court documents, local authority records and enquiries with the police. The Family Court Adviser also had phone calls with Mr and Mrs Z to summarise their views of relevant safeguarding issues.

15. Cafcass explained it received Mr Z’s statement and his response to Mrs Z’s claims on 9 September 2024. It said his statement was included in the bundle of evidence seen by the family court, as it was evidence in the court proceedings.

16. In accordance with Practice Direction 12B, Cafcass had no obligation to review, examine or act on Mr Z’s written statement responding to the concerns. That responsibility lay with the court.

17. We recognise Mr Z feels let down by the actions of Cafcass. We understand this was distressing for him at an already difficult time.

18. Having considered the actions of Cafcass, it relied on relevant information and carried out its responsibilities in line with relevant guidance when preparing the safeguarding letter.

Content of the letter

19. Mr Z also complains the Family Court Adviser’s safeguarding letter advised the family court he should not be allowed to contact his children due to the risk of harm. Mr Z feels the Family Court Adviser should not have included this information in their letter as he says no such allegations existed.

20. Mr Z says it was only good fortune the family court judge who reviewed the safeguarding letter decided to contact the Family Court Adviser directly. Following this discussion, the judge decided to maintain existing contact arrangements.

21. We have limited our consideration to whether the evidence available to the Family Court Adviser supported their advice. This is because the letter is effectively evidence for the judge to rely on when reaching a decision on interim care arrangements.

22. We cannot challenge a judge’s decision, and it is a judge who decides any contact arrangements. We cannot consider any decision they make regardless of the information presented to them. Nevertheless, we recognise that false or inaccurate information can be distressing and understand the emotional impact Cafcass’s letter caused Mr Z.

23. Section 13 of Practice Direction 12B concerns safeguarding. Paragraphs 13.1 and 13.3 requires Cafcass report any concerns about safety and potential risks of harm to children to the court. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 says a child is a victim of domestic abuse if they see, hear, or experience its effects.

24. A Family Court Adviser is accountable to Cafcass for their professional conduct but responsible to court for their professional judgement. The advice they give is professional judgement. Once a Family Court Adviser presents their report to court, it becomes part of the evidence base a judge uses to make a decision.

25. Cafcass can correct factual errors such as wrongly recorded names and dates. However, it cannot decide whether one parent’s evidence is accurate or not. If parents are in dispute, then this should be decided in court by the judge.

26. Cafcass explained Family Court Advisers apply their professional judgement as to what they include in their letter. Importantly, there is no expectation from the court that the safeguarding letter should refer to all information gathered during their enquiries. Instead, the letter should focus on what the Family Court Adviser believes is relevant.

27. The Family Court Adviser’s role is to set out what the parties have said. It is then for the judge to determine if what has been said is true and decide on care arrangements.

28. The safeguarding letter sets out that Mrs Z reported experiencing sexual and domestic abuse by Mr Z. We have seen the court application form, supplementary information, and her safeguarding interview underpinning this. The safeguarding letter summarises her account. It identifies her experience as an issue, but does not say it was a statement of fact.

29. The safeguarding letter says, ‘Given the risk of sexual harm and the reported views of the children…’. This reflected information Mrs Z shared regarding her experiences of domestic and sexual abuse, and information obtained from the local authority checks.

30. The Family Court Adviser reported their concerns to the court in the safeguarding letter. They explained the evidence they had seen, as well as their view that further assessment would assist in determining appropriate child care arrangements.

31. The safeguarding letter did not state that any risk of sexual harm was directed toward the children. Instead, the reference to sexual harm related to Mrs Z’s personal account of abuse directed toward her.

32. Cafcass told us it recognises this information has caused Mr Z a lot of distress.

33. We understand Mr Z feels so strongly about the information contained within the letter because he feels it says he is capable of abusing his children directly. We understand it has been exceptionally distressing for him to believe others are accusing him of posing this risk.

34. We have looked at the Family Court Adviser’s safeguarding letter and the evidence they used when writing it. Having done so, we consider they accurately presented relevant evidence Mrs Z provided in line with the relevant guidance. We therefore consider nothing went wrong here.

35. We can see why this experience was so upsetting for Mr Z given the immense concern it understandably caused him.

1. We have carefully considered Mr Z’s complaint about Cafcass. Having done so, we have seen no indication anything went seriously wrong.

2. We know this series of events has been exceptionally distressing for Mr Z. We understand the significant impact on his day-to-day life, and recognise he remains unhappy about what happened.