A distraught father has accused police of failing to protect his 14-year-old daughter from a convicted sex offender.

The father has contacted the police 137 times and been to court 15 times in a bid to keep the man at bay, but he is still free and seeing his daughter.

The man, Richard John Barden, 34, has admitted having unlawful sex. But because the girl herself will not make a complaint, police cannot prosecute.

Instead, Barden, of Wyckham Lane, Steyning, was cautioned for unlawful sex and put on the sex offenders' register for ten years.

The predicament echoes a similar case last year when another couple appealed to Lewes MP Norman Baker after they discovered their 12-year-old daughter was having a relationship with a 22-year-old man.

In the latest case, the girl's father alerted Sussex Police and West Sussex Social Services when he realised his daughter was having a sexual relationship with the married odd-job man three years ago.

Now the father, who cannot be named to protect his daughter, is demanding a change in the law.

He said: "I am furious about the lack of police action and the complete incompetence of social services. For three years I have battled on my own. This paedophile is still free and able to harm other children and it is costing the taxpayer thousands."

Police say they can only take action if the girl herself makes a complaint.

Although they are powerless to act against Barden, they have twice cautioned the girl's father for attempting to cause a breach of the peace.

The 41-year-old from West Sussex, is now attempting to claim back the £8,000 he has spent trying to get the case to court.

The man believes his daughter, who is now 17, started seeing Barden in April 2000 although he did not find out about their affair until July 2000. Even after being cautioned by police, the man continued to see his daughter.

In December 2000, in a desperate bid to try and protect his daughter, the father applied to have her made a ward of court and got a High Court injunction preventing Barden from contacting her. But still he continued to see her.

The father has since been to court another 14 times to try to have the man jailed for flouting the order.

In April 2001, after being alerted by the father, police found the pair together and took the girl into protective custody. In July 2001, the High Court jailed Barden for seven months for breaching the injunction.

In August he was given a further 12 months at Hove Crown Court for indecently assaulting another 15-year-old girl.

He was released in early 2002 and began seeing the daughter again and, the father believes, other girls.

In January this year, Barden was back in court charged with threatening to harm witnesses. He was bound over in the sum of £500 to keep the peace for a year.

The father said: "I think I have done everything I can. I have managed to put him in prison but it was for a breach of an order, not for having underage sex with my daughter. And all the time I've been battling, I have had the police on the phone asking me what I think I'm doing. They say they can't help me.

"The words that keep coming up are 'significant harm'. But I have never been given the chance to prove she is at risk from significant harm."

The injunction to 'protect' his daughter runs until she is 18 in May. But the father says the court order is and always has been worthless.

He said: "All I want is to get this man off the streets and protect other girls. I've already spent £8,000 - money I don't have. If social services had not been such an incompetent shambles, this would not have happened".

The man said his relationship with his daughter had disintegrated to 'non-existent'. She has been to court herself to try and be released from being a ward of court.

The father said: "She was told by the judge, in his opinion the man was dangerous. But she won't listen."

The father is divorced from the girl's mother and, although she initially supported him, she has now resigned herself to the situation.

He said: "All I'm interested in is putting pressure on the authorities to get the law changed.

"I'm a little fish in a big ocean but I'm not alone. It is in the public interest to take it to court and get the law changed. At the moment, police have no power of arrest if there is no violence involved. I want the law to take into account 'significant harm'."

Barden is separated from his wife, Lisa, who lives in Storrington.

The Argus has approached Barden on many occasions but he has consistently refused to talk about his behaviour.

The father believes the police have failed him.

He said: "It doesn't matter how loud you shout, the police don't listen. The say they have done their job but I don't think they have. It was their duty to protect a minor. If they had acted earlier they would have saved us all a lot of time, heartache and stress.

"My daughter has lost three of the best years of her life because of this man. She should be out having fun like other teenagers, not under the influence of this paedophile."

The father made a formal complaint to Sussex Police and the matter was referred to the Police Complaints Authority (PCA).

Yesterday, a spokeswoman said the matter had been investigated and was now closed.

She said: "The father made seven complaints about Sussex Police but the PCA felt there were no reasonable grounds for any further investigation. We have written to the man telling him of our findings."

The spokeswoman added police had no power of arrest for civil injunctions unless they were given permission to do so by the courts. However, they could take a child into protection under Section 46 of the Children's Act 1989 if there were reasonable grounds to believe the child was likely to suffer significant harm.

Simon Eden, media relations manager for West Sussex County Council, said: "It is not our policy to comment on individual cases but if the gentleman concerned wants to pursue it any further, we will make further comment in court."

Norman Baker, MP for Lewes, who highlighted last year's case, is supporting this father and other families in their fight to change the law.

He said: "The awful truth is those who are most vulnerable and who most need the support of the law have been neglected, let down by a system which favours the abuser.'

"However, as a consequence of the case of the 12-year-old, the police have been given new powers to tackle sex offenders. They can use bugging and secret filming to catch adults suspected of having sexual relationships with children under 13.

"These new powers also allow them to prosecute sex offenders even if the child involved is unwilling to testify."

Although intrusive surveillance required justification under the Human Rights Act, the need to protect children outweighed concerns over privacy.

Mr Baker said: "Although this change in the law doesn't help this particular father, I think we are now seeing a change of mind set from the police.

"However, there is still some way to go."

The father's own MP, Howard Flight, said he had been involved in supporting his constituent for some time.