Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council was at fault in its management of a child protection matter in relation to the complainant’s daughter. This is because we would not seek to add anything to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains that the Council was at fault in its management of a child protection matter in relation to her daughter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we would not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X’s daughter was the subject of a child protection enquiry following an allegation against Ms X’s former partner. She complains that the Council initially failed to take the lead in the matter and that its intervention was delayed by some days.
6. Ms X further complains that when the Council did take action, the male social worker inappropriately interviewed her daughter in her bedroom. She says that the social worker stated he had no concerns but that an initial child protection conference was called. It was subsequently cancelled.
7. Ms X’s complaint to the Council was upheld in part. The Council accepted that it should have acted some days earlier. It did not accept however that it was wrong of its social worker to carry out the interview in the way he did.
8. The Council clarified that, following discussion with the police, it was decided to initiate a child protection enquiry under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989. Subsequent consideration led to the conclusion that Ms X’s daughter was not at ongoing risk of harm, so no initial child protection conference was deemed necessary.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we would not seek to add anything to the findings of the investigation the Council has already carried out. The Council has accepted that there was fault in its initial response to the referral. The Ombudsman will not normally intervene to reinvestigate complaints which have already been upheld, and there is no merit in doing so in this case.
10. Turning to those aspects of the complaint which the Council did not uphold, Ms X disagrees with the Council’s actions but that does not mean they amount to fault. The Council has properly set out the reasons for its actions and they appear to be reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances. That being the case, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the professional judgement of the Council’s officers or intervene to substitute an alternative view. Our intervention is not therefore warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we would not seek to add anything to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman