-
Case ref:201404039
-
Date:February 2015
-
Body:A Council
-
Sector:Local Government
-
Outcome:Some upheld, no recommendations
-
Subject:policy/administration
Summary
Mr C complained that a council advisory service did not have permission to work with his children. Mr C thought that the service had a duty to validate information provided by potential service users before offering a support service. Mr C told us that the council failed to reply to two letters he wrote to them.
We found no evidence that the service had a duty to work in the way that Mr C would have preferred. Mr C did not dispute that his former partner had given consent and we found that this consent was sufficient to allow the council to provide a service to the children.
The council acknowledged that they had not answered two letters sent directly to the service as they should have done. They told us that steps had been taken to ensure that this would not happen again and had apologised to Mr C.
When it was originally published in February 2015, this case was wrongly categorised as 'not upheld'. The correct category is 'some upheld'.