Summary: We have upheld this complaint because the Council failed to write to the complainant to inform him of the outcome of safeguarding enquiries it made about his child and because it failed to respond to his complaint about the matter. The Council has now agreed to resolve the complaint by writing to the complainant to inform him of the outcome of its safeguarding enquiries and will consider his complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about how the Council dealt with a safeguarding referral he made regarding his child and about how the Council dealt with his complaint about this matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share the final decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In January 2023, Mr X submitted a safeguarding referral about the care of his son. Records show that the Council made the decision to take no further action. Mr X says he was not informed about this and when he submitted a complaint did not receive a response, despite the Council saying it would consider the matter under the three-stage procedure for complains about children’s social care services. The Council told the Ombudsman that it did not consider Mr X’s complaint because of ongoing court proceedings surrounding the care and contact arrangements of Mr X’s child.
7. If we were to investigate this complaint it is likely we would find the Council at fault. This is because the Council’s policy states that parents should be informed of the outcome of any safeguarding enquires and this did not happen here.
8. We would also likely find fault in how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint. Whilst Regulation 8 of The Children Act 1989 Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006 says councils can refuse a complaint if to do so could prejudice concurrent court proceedings. Complainants have a right to resubmit their complaints once court proceedings have concluded. In this case the Council did not inform Mr X that it was not investigating his complaint and about his right to resubmit his complaint once proceedings have concluded.
9. We therefore asked the Council to write to Mr X to inform him of the outcome of its safeguarding enquiries. We also asked it to either investigate Mr X’s complaint now or to write to him to inform him why it would not and to advise him of his right to resubmit his complaint once proceedings have concluded.
10. To its credit, the Council agreed to resolve the complaint and has agreed to write to Mr X with the outcome of its safeguarding enquiries and to consider Mr X’s complaint at stage one of the procedure. It should complete these actions within one month of the date of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We have upheld this complaint. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing an appropriate remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman