Cafcass failed to follow conflict of interest policy

Ms C and her ex-partner were involved in court proceedings about contact and residence for their daughter. Cafcass was asked to produce a report for court. It assigned the case to a family court adviser without investigating or acting upon any potential conflict of interest that might exist.

Ms C was unhappy about the report and believed that it was biased against her. She spoke to Cafcass on the phone about her concerns. After the final court hearing, she raised concerns with Cafcass that there had been a conflict of interest. Although this was after the six-month deadline for making a complaint, Cafcass had discretion to decide to investigate, but chose not to.

What we found

Cafcass's conflict of interest policy states that the policy applies when one of the parties perceives that there is a conflict of interest. Ms C produced documentation that led her to believe that a potential conflict of interest might exist, which meant that Cafcass should have followed its conflict of interest policy. Its failure to do so was maladministration. However, we found no indication of bias in the family court adviser's report.

Ms C believed that Cafcass should have treated a telephone call within the six months as a complaint, but we found no failing in how Cafcass handled her call. However, when she complained again two years later, after the final hearing, we found that Cafcass should have given her an opportunity to explain why she had breached the six-month deadline, and should have looked at the new information she presented before making a decision not to pursue her complaint.

We found that Cafcass's actions resulted in a situation that the conflict of interest policy was designed to prevent and Ms C said that she had no confidence in its report. She should not have been put in this position. She also felt that she could not get her voice heard when Cafcass failed to respond to her complaint, and we considered that was an injustice. Had Cafcass given Ms C a full and thorough explanation, it might have alleviated her loss of confidence in Cafcass.

Putting it right

Cafcass wrote to Ms C to apologise for its failings. It paid her £250 for the frustration, distress and loss of confidence brought about by its maladministration.