Summary: Mr X is not satisfied with the Council’s investigation and response to his complaint about its children’s services department. He does not consider the Council properly addressed his complaint. The Ombudsman has discontinued his investigation. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault, and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X is not satisfied with the Council’s investigation and response to his complaint about its children’s services department. He does not consider the Council properly addressed his complaint.
2. Mr X wants his complaint to be fully considered. He also wants the Council to acknowledge the issues he raised.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

4. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have considered the following:
• The complaint and the documents provided by the complainant.
• Documents provided by the Council.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. I have detailed below some of the events leading to Mr X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
8. Mr X complained about the Council’s children’s services department and its handling of his children’s case on 11 March 2021. He said he was treated unfairly due to his nationality and ethnicity and the social worker labelled him as ‘a black guy who had a relationship with a young white girl’.
9. The Council sent its stage one complaint response on 15 April. It said:
• Mr X’s social worker communicated with him frequently to keep him informed.
• The social worker returned Mr X’s calls and sent him text message updates, as per his request.
• Mr X attended a meeting in September 2020 but failed to attend the next meeting in October. He attended again in February 2021.
• The records suggest it has been difficult to arrange meetings at convenient times for Mr X. Mr X also had difficulty joining virtual meetings.
• The social worker was unavailable for the meeting on 9 October and the children’s mother did not wish to proceed without them. It said Mr X was informed about this.
• Mr X asked for the social worker to make arrangements with the children’s mother and then communicate this to him.
• It is important for the social worker to get a sense and understanding of a family’s culture and heritage. It found no evidence Mr X was labelled as he suggested.
10. Mr X’s solicitor wrote to the Council on 25 May, complaining about:
• Issues around arrangements for a contact session in October 2020.
• The social worker not consulting Mr X about his availability for meetings.
• The social worker not rearranging a meeting in January 2020 which Mr X could not attend.
• Video conferences arranged without confirming Mr X’s availability.
• Unfair treatment due to Mr X’s nationality and ethnicity.
• Lack of communication.
• Lack of consistency and urgency from children’s services, impacting Mr Xs relationship with his children.
11. The Council sent its stage two complaint response on 5 August. It did not uphold Mr X’s complaint for the following reasons:
• It examined Mr X’s contact with officers in October 2020 but found no fault.
• The social worker communicated with Mr X by text message, as per his request. It did not find evidence the social worker failed to consult Mr X about meetings.
• There was no evidence Mr X told officers he could not attend a meeting in January 2020, or that officers failed to respond to him. It said an officer sent Mr X a text message in advance of the meeting and tried to telephone him on the day of the meeting.
• Children in need meetings have to be arranged around the availability of several people. It considered officers tried to accommodate Mr X where possible and they did not ask him to make himself available at short notice.
• It could not find any records where officers commented on Mr X’s ethnicity. However, an officer did incorrectly record his nationality on an assessment. It repeated that it was important for officers to gain an understanding of a family’s culture and heritage as part of the assessment process. Comments about how long Mr X has been in the UK were relevant to the culture in the UK around chastising children. The Council found no evidence Mr X was prejudiced or labelled due to his ethnicity.
• It sent Mr X copies of the children in need reviews from September and October 2020, as well as an assessment from August 2020. It apologised if it did not provide all reports in a timely manner.
• It completed an assessment in August 2020, within the 45 working day timescale, and put a children in need plan in place. There were subsequent meetings between September 2020 and February 2021. It did not accept there were any inconsistencies or lack of urgency.
12. Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman on 3 November 2021.

Analysis

13. Having considered the Council’s response to Mr X’s complaint, I do not consider there is enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation of the complaint.
14. On the evidence seen, I consider the Council fully considered and responded to each element of Mr X’s complaint. The Council went into detail in its stage two response, with reference to contemporaneous records. I therefore do not consider we can add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have discontinued my investigation. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault, and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman