Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out under the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision to close its children’s services case for her children and about its decision to end support in the form of breakfast and after school club funding.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X complaint was addressed under the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services. The complaint was made up of 4 separate parts. In the course of the three stages of the statutory procedure, none of the parts of the complaint were upheld.
6. The statutory procedure is the appropriate route by which to complain about such matters and it is not for the Ombudsman to reinvestigate complaints which have been properly investigated.
7. The question therefore is if there is evidence of fault in the statutory procedure which has affected the outcome. Having considered the complaints and responses at all stages, I can identify no evidence of fault.
8. There is nothing to suggest fault in the way the Investigating Officer and Independent Person considered the complaint at Stage 2. The Investigating Officer’s report is comprehensive and the outcome defensible.
9. Stage 3 of the procedure provided Miss X with the route by which to challenge the findings. I note that she had the opportunity to make verbal and written representations to the Review Panel, which the records show it considered.
10. Because the evidence shows that the statutory children’s services complaint procedure was properly implemented, and its findings were reasonable and defensible, it is not for the Ombudsman to criticise the merits of the findings or intervene to substitute an alternative view. Our intervention would not add to the investigation which has already been carried out. For this reason, I will not investigate Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman