Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take his views into account when it carried out a child and family assessment. Mr X said this affected subsequent legal proceedings. The Council has admitted it was at fault, apologised and taken appropriate steps to prevent similar faults from occurring in future. It should also ensure a copy of the final decision statement is placed on Mr X’s records and remind the relevant staff of the timescales for circulating the minutes from safeguarding strategy meetings.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not take into account his views as part of a child and family assessment about his children. He says it uncritically believed the children’s mother, Ms Y, who he says the Council treated favourably.
2. He says this affected subsequent legal proceedings, putting him at a disadvantage and affected his welfare. He wants the Council to write to those it has shared information with to state its views were unfounded and to explain what happened to him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
7. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. We spoke to Mr X and considered his view of his complaint.
9. We made enquiries of the Council and considered the information it provided.
10. I gave Mr X and the Council the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation

11. The Children Act 1989 says a child’s needs and welfare are paramount and their needs and wishes should be put first. This is so the child gets support they need before a problem gets worse. Safeguarding children is everyone’s responsibility.
12. Councils have a duty to make enquiries where a child is considered to be suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. This is to check what is happening and decide whether to take protective action under section 47 of the Children Act.
13. The council can decide, through early assessment, that a child’s case does not meet the threshold of significant harm but the child needs some help. If so, it can deal with the case as a child in need under section 17 of the Children Act.

Circulation of minutes

14. The Council should circulate the minutes of safeguarding strategy meetings within one day.

Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass)

15. Cafcass represents children in family court cases in England. Its role is to ensure children’s voices are heard in the family court setting, and that decisions are made in their best interests.

Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO)

16. Every Council which has responsibility for children’s services must have a LADO. One of the roles of the LADO is to oversee allegations about adults who work or volunteer with children.

Background

17. In July 2018 Mr X alerted the Council to concerns about his children, who were living with his former partner, Ms Y. The Council carried out a strategy meeting. This was attended by the Council, the Police and a representative from the nursery one of his children attended. The decision, after consideration of the evidence, was that the children’s situation did not meet the threshold for a section 47 investigation. Instead the Council decided to carry out a child and family assessment.
18. The Council circulated the minutes from this meeting 11 days after the meeting was held.
19. The child and family assessment was carried out in August 2018 by a social worker. A Council manager signed off the assessment. Information was gathered from the social worker at the hospital one of the children attended, a home visit to Ms Y and telephone calls to both parents. The assessment recorded the Council had no significant concerns about the care of the children. The notes recorded the Council’s view that the parents were reporting information against each other because of their acrimonious break-up. The meeting referred to the need to contact the LADO because Ms Y had contact with children through her job.

Mr X’s complaint

20. Mr X complained that the Council’s assessment was biased and contained lies and false accusations made by Ms Y. He said the Council had not asked for his opinions or views about what was happening at the assessment. The assessment was shared with other organisations. Mr X said this meant his voice was not heard at subsequent court proceedings. He also said the LADO had not been contacted.
21. The Council responded to Mr X on 23 July 2019 having met with him to discuss his complaint. It said:
• it had not explained the assessment process to Mr X or given him sufficient opportunities to contribute to the assessment;
• its assessment had not recorded Mr X’s views about the incident and needs of the children. It apologised for this;
• it apologised that the LADO had not been involved in the case;
• the Court had not asked the Council for a report. The social worker’s views may have been shared with CAFCASS and it was possible this had informed their decision making in relation to the subsequent court case;
• it understood Mr X had shared information and concerns with the social worker but this was not recorded on case notes. It had not responded to all of Mr X’s calls about this. It apologised he did not feel he was listened to or given opportunities to share concerns; and
• it apologised for its limited contact with Mr X about decision making for the children and safeguarding concerns. However, the threshold for intervention had not been met.
22. Mr X complained again on 9 August 2019, going into more detail about what he said were flaws in the assessment showing the Council had ignored evidence and discriminated against him. He was concerned the Council had not contacted the LADO about the situation as the strategy meeting required. He was concerned the assessment wrongly said Ms Y’s network was supportive for the children. He believed it put them at risk. He set out concerns about Ms Y’s behaviour. He wanted the Council to explain its actions, correct inaccuracies and write to agencies involved in ongoing court action.
23. The Council replied on 9 September 2019. It said:
• its child and family assessment had not been balanced. It apologised for this. The Court had not asked to see the assessment or ordered the Council to write a report for it;
• the case was closed and so it would not write to other organisations about the Council’s ongoing involvement. There was nothing to report. Mr X should continue to report to the Council any concerns about the children;
• it had failed to follow procedure to involve the LADO in the case, which it should have done, given the children’s mother’s employment. It had improved practice to avoid a repetition of this fault;
• it had added information to Mr X’s children’s electronic file to record Mr X’s views about the important missing information and mistakes in the assessment;
• it had not been able to investigate Mr X’s complaint about discrimination because the social worker had left the Council. It apologised that Mr X felt he had been treated differently;
• it apologised it had not returned Mr X’s calls;
• its case notes would continue to record the children’s mother’s opinions but the additional evidence Mr X had provided would be added to ensure balance; and
• the Council was not party to any ongoing court action about the family. It had not made representations to Court about Mr X. It could not influence decisions about legal aid.
24. Mr X told us he wanted the Council to make sure agencies that received the assessment know his point of view about what happened, explaining it did not seek his input to the assessment. He wanted the Council to share the safety plan with him and review his case, including explaining action taken about staff. He believed the Council had tried to influence the Court.

My findings

25. As part of my investigation, I have looked at the case records, the notes from the initial strategy meeting, the children and family assessment and the complaints correspondence. The Council has also provided an update on the actions it told Mr X it would carry out as a result of his complaint.
26. The Council has already admitted it acted with fault. It has apologised to Mr X and explained what steps it will take to help prevent similar faults occurring in the future. I am satisfied those actions have been carried out. It is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council or come to a different outcome.
27. The Council circulated the minutes from the safeguarding strategy meeting 11 days after it took place, instead of on the following day. This is fault. However, it is unlikely it caused Mr X a significant personal injustice. The Council should take steps, however, to ensure minutes are circulated in a timely manner in future.
28. In relation to Mr X’s request that the Council share its findings of fault with other organisations involved, the Council stated it had informed the children’s nursery that the case was closed and it had no ongoing safeguarding concerns. I have seen evidence to demonstrate it has updated its records to ensure Mr X’s views are on file. The Council should include a copy of the final decision statement on Mr X’s records. I would not expect the Council to take additional action. However, it is open to Mr X to share the findings of the Council’s complaints investigation with the nursery, the school, the hospital and the Police if he wishes.
29. The Council informed Mr X the courts did not request information about the safeguarding enquiries that the Council carried out. However, it said there was a possibility that the social worker may have spoken to Cafcass about their views.
30. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. Therefore, I will not investigate this matter further. However, even if I did investigate, it is unlikely I could come to a finding. The social worker has left the Council, so I do not know what, if anything was said. And even if I did, I could not know to what extent any conversation influenced the views of Cafcass or the courts.

Back to top

Agreed actions

31. Within one month of the date of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
• remind the relevant staff of the deadline for circulating the minutes from safeguarding strategy meetings; and
• place a copy of the Ombudsman’s final decision statement on Mr X’s records.

Back to top

Final decision

32. The Council has already admitted it acted with fault. It has taken some appropriate actions to prevent similar faults occurring in the future. It has agreed to my recommendations. Therefore, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman