Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has been at fault in the course of child protection action relating to the complainant’s children. There is no evidence that the Council is at fault in deciding to pause its consideration of the complaint and there are no grounds for us to intervene.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains that:

• the Council’s child protection enquiry was led by a social worker who had previously been removed from her children’s case; and
• the Council has unreasonably initiated the Public Law Outline process.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

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. Mrs X’s children are the subject of child protection action. Mrs X complains that the enquiry under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989 was carried out by a social worker who was previously involved with her children’s case and had made her children subject to a child protection plan. She says the social worker was removed from the case and believes she should not be involved with the current assessment.
6. Mrs X further complains that the Council has unreasonably initiated the Public Law Outline (PLO) process. She says the Council has ignored concrete evidence and given undue weight to historical information.
7. The Council has accepted Mrs X’s complaints but has decided to put them on hold during the PLO process. It says it will not consider them until a decision on whether to proceed with legal action has been made.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. On the face of it, the Council has not refused to consider Mrs X’s concerns as formal complaints. Rather, it has said that it will not do so until a decision has been made on whether to take the matter to court. That is a reasonable position for the Council to take and the Ombudsman will not criticise it, or intervene to substitute an alternative view.
9. Once the PLO process has concluded, the Ombudsman would expect the Council to reconsider the matter if Mrs X asks it to do so. If she is unhappy with its response, she may complain again. There are however no grounds for the Ombudsman to investigate at this point and we will not do so.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is no evidence that the Council is at fault in deciding to pause its consideration of the complaint and there are no grounds for us to intervene.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman