Plymouth City Council (20 007 320)
Category : Children's care services > Friends and family carers
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 15 Jan 2021
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the actions of Council officers during care proceedings for their grandchild. We cannot investigate the complaint because we cannot investigate a complaint about the start of Court action or what happened in Court.
The complaint
- Mr and Mrs X complained about the actions of Council officers during care proceedings for their grandchild. They said a number of officers provided inaccurate information to the Courts and to a fostering panel. They said this disadvantaged their case, caused them and their daughter huge distress and affected the outcome for their grandchild.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of Court action or what happened in Court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
- The Courts have said that we cannot investigate a complaint about any action by a council, concerning a matter which is itself out of our jurisdiction. (R (on the application of M) v Commissioner for Local Administration [2006] EHWCC 2847 (Admin))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered the information in Mr and Mrs X’s complaint, further information they sent and spoke to Mr X. I checked the current legal situation with the Council.
- Mr and Mrs X had an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered their comments before making the final decision.
What I found
What happened
- Mr and Mrs X’s daughter, Ms Y had a baby, C. Ms Y was unable to care for C because of her own mental health needs. Mr and Mrs X then looked after C at their home.
- The Council started care proceedings and while C was with Mr and Mrs X the Court made an interim care order. The Court also set out a series of expectations for Ms Y, one being she should not visit her parents while C was with them.
- Mr and Mrs X said the content of the Council’s report to the Court included many inaccuracies and showed bias against them and their daughter.
- Mr and Mrs X said when Ms Y saw the information presented to Court it caused her mental health to deteriorate hugely. They also said the flawed information affected the Court’s decisions and therefore C’s future. Once the Court had said Ms Y should not visit while C was with them, Mr and Mrs X decided they could not pursue the option of fostering C.
- The Council wrote a report for a fostering panel. Mr and Mrs X said the Council repeated its inaccuracies in this and the panel failed to take that into account.
- C was then placed with foster carers outside C’s family, with a view to the foster family adopting C. The Court has now agreed C’s adoption.
Analysis
- The Council had a responsibility to ensure C was safe and to work towards C having a stable long-term future. But the Court made the crucial decisions for C’s future, including the decision C should be adopted.
- We cannot investigate the information provided to a Court which it relies on to make its decision. We cannot investigate the case the Council presented to the Court. We also cannot investigate the Court’s decisions.
- The substantive issue here is the information the Court considered in order to make its decisions about C’s future. It is outside our jurisdiction to investigate this. The information the Council provided to the fostering panel is inextricably linked to the information used by the Court. We cannot investigate this because we cannot investigate a complaint about a matter which is itself outside our jurisdiction.
Final decision
- We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot investigate a complaint about the start of Court action or what happened in Court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman