Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Falkirk Council

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Not Upheld Reference 201702040 Sector Local Government Category child services and family support Decided 01 April 2018

View Falkirk Council scorecard

Full decision

Summary

Mr and Mrs C applied to be kinship carers for a child related to them. A kinship care assessment was produced by the social work department and it recommended that Mr and Mrs C should not be approved as kinship carers. Mr and Mrs C complained that the content of the report and the recommendation made was unreasonable. Mr and Mrs C were unhappy with the council's response and brought their complaint to us.

We took independent advice from a social worker who highlighted that the term 'person of concern' had been used to describe Mrs C within the document and that this was unreasonable. The council acknowledged this was unreasonable as it was not a term they would normally use. While there was issues with precise wording, we found that the information included in the document and the recommendation made was reasonable. Therefore, we did not uphold Mr and Mrs C's complaint.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201702040 as a PDF (10.97 KB) Updated: December 2, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving Falkirk Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
202307184 01 Oct 2025 C, a council tenant, complained that the council had failed to replace their kitchen, which was outdated and in a … Partly Upheld
202403907 01 May 2025 C complained that the council unreasonably failed to assess their housing application in accordance with their policies and procedures. C … Upheld
202402009 01 Apr 2025 C complained to the council that they had unlawfully carried out repairs to the communal roof and chimney of a … Upheld
201900986 01 Mar 2023 C complained about the service provided by the council's social work service in connection with their child (A), who resided … Upheld
201910292 01 Apr 2022 C is the owner of a 'four-in-a-block' flat and the other three properties in the block are owned by the … Not Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation