Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to concerns about its role in child protection procedures. This is because we are unlikely to add anything significant to the investigation already carried out.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about Derbyshire County Council (the Council) and its response to her concerns about safeguarding and child protection proceedings.

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 may decide not to start an investigation if 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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. The complainant had an opportunity to comment on a draft decision statement. I considered her comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X attended a 10-day check-up appointment with her baby in February 2021. She mentioned some marks on her baby’s foot that had appeared after a heal prick test five day’s earlier. Miss X asked if a blood test should be considered to check her baby’s clotting. She said the midwife agreed and arranged for Miss X to go to the hospital. After Miss X arrived at the hospital with her baby, the hospital started safeguarding procedures on the basis there was “unexplained bruising”. It made a referral to Children’s Services at the Council.
7. Miss X complained about the way the Council communicated with her and that it did not follow child protection procedures correctly. She also complained to the hospital about its role. This complaint is being considered separately.
8. Miss X’s complaint to the Council completed the three stages of the Statutory Children’s Complaints procedure. The complaint was upheld in part, but the investigation did not uphold a complaint that a manager said Miss X did not take the proceedings seriously. The investigation explained the reasons for this statement and concluded it was a matter of professional judgement.
9. Investigation by the Ombudsman is not warranted because it is unlikely we would add anything significant to the response the Council has made. The documents show the complaint was properly considered and included an independent investigation. Miss X also had opportunities to provide input at the appropriate stages. The Council accepted the recommendations made by the independent investigator.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would add anything significant to the investigation already carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman