Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on the placement of a looked after child. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council has reached its decision and so we cannot question its merits.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Miss X, says that the Council:

• Has failed to consider properly her wishes and feelings, in line with Children Act 1989, when considering her request to move to a suitable placement in Scotland; and
• Has failed to consider properly whether she is at greater risk in London than in Scotland.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe: it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Miss X. I also considered the Council’s responses to her complaint. I sent a draft decision to Miss X for comment.

Back to top

What I found

5. Under Section 20 of the Children Act 1989, councils have a duty to provide accommodation for any child in need within their area who appears to require accommodation because: there is no person who has parental responsibility for them; they are lost or abandoned; or the person who has been caring for them has been prevented from providing suitable accommodation or care. This makes the child a ‘looked after child’. In these circumstances, the Council takes on parental responsibilities for the child, and can either provide accommodation or arrange for accommodation to be provided.
6. Before making any decision with respect to a looked after child, the Council must, so far as is reasonably practicable, ascertain and consider the wishes and feelings of the child, as well as the child’s religious persuasion, racial origin and cultural and linguistic background.
7. Miss X became a looked after child in 2018.
8. Miss X says that she has consistently requested the Council move her to a suitable placement in Scotland, which is where she is from. She says that the Council has not considered her wishes and feelings when refusing her request.
9. Miss X also complains that the Council has not considered that she is at greater risk in London than in Scotland as she has told the Council she will continue to try to runaway to Scotland. Miss X says she feels more unsafe in London than in Scotland. She also complains that her current children’s home placement makes her anxious due to frequent changes in children and staff.
10. Miss X says she would like the Council to put a plan in place to secure her move to Scotland.
11. The Council says, after considering Miss X’s wishes, it cannot accept her request as the Council does not think the complainant would be safe in Scotland. The Council considered the information provided by Miss X concerning harm she was exposed to there and lack of adequate care from family. It also considered the absence of information on Miss X’s family who the Council had not been able to trace.
12. Regarding Miss X’s current placement, the Council says this offers professional, therapeutic and educational support, which it does not wish to disrupt.
13. The Council did not progress the complainant’s complaint to a Stage 2 response as it decided the complaints procedure could not provide Miss X’s desired outcome of having her request reconsidered.
14. I understand that Miss X is unhappy with the Council’s decision to refuse her request to return to live in Scotland. However, the Council’s responses show they have considered the complainant’s wishes and feelings, as well as information provided by her on her previous experiences in Scotland, when deciding to refuse her request on the basis that it does not think Miss X would be safe in Scotland. The Council has a duty to safeguard the welfare of a looked after child and is allowed to take such a decision. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and we cannot criticise decisions taken without evidence of fault in how a Council reached a decision. An investigation is, therefore, not warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have decided that the Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council has reached its decision and so we cannot question its merits.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman