Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s children’s services team. An investigation would not add anything to the Council’s response or achieve the outcome Mr X wants. If Mr X wants to challenge the contact arrangements with his children, he should do this in court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that he was not invited to Team Around the Family (TAF) meetings which meant the Council did not consider his views. Mr X feels this influenced the Court’s decision to reduce contact with his children. Mr X says this caused him distress and wants disciplinary action taken against those involved.

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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

3. 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council has accepted it should have invited Mr X to the TAF meetings. It has apologised and said it will provide further staff training. An investigation would not add anything to the Council’s response.
9. We could not say Mr X’s absence from the TAF meetings led to the court reaching a particular decision about his contact with his children. We also have no power to investigate what happens in court, including the content of any reports or assessments that have been presented as part of proceedings. Mr X had the chance to challenge information presented by the Council in court. If he wishes to challenge the contact arrangements he will need to return to court. We have no power to change them and so there is no worthwhile outcome we could achieve.
10. We cannot by law investigate how the Council manages its staff, so we could not recommend it considers or takes disciplinary action.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome. If Mr X wants to challenge contact arrangements with his children, it would be reasonable for him to go to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman