Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to investigate her concerns that her former partner was receiving funding for their child but was not using it for the child’s benefit. She also says the Council failed to act on her request to remove the child from the funding programme. We found the Council investigated Ms X’s concerns but failed to act promptly on her request to remove the child from the funding programme. The Council has provided a satisfactory remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council failed to investigate her concerns that her former partner was receiving funding for their child but was not using this for the child’s benefit. She also says the Council ignored her request to remove her child from the funding programme. She says this has caused her distress and she has been put to inconvenience in pursuing the matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information provided by Ms X together with information provided by the Council.
4. Ms 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

Legal and administrative background

5. Following the Grenfell Tower fire, the Council together with the NHS, set up a Dedicated Service to provide ongoing support to the bereaved and survivors.
6. People who are eligible for the Dedicated Service include:
• the closely bereaved
• the household of the closely bereaved
• survivors.
7. Survivors are defined as adults and children who lived at Grenfell Tower as their main home at the time of the fire, including children born since, together with people who were visiting Grenfell Tower on the night of the fire.
8. Those who are eligible for the Dedicated Service have access to a Dedicated Service worker and services commissioned for all bereaved and survivors. In addition, the bereaved, survivors and their eligible children can apply for supplementary individual services designed to help them meet specific needs that are particular to their personal circumstances. Eligible adults and eligible children can a personal budget each year.

Key facts

9. Ms X has a child, C, with her former partner, Mr Y, who is a survivor of the Grenfell Tower fire. She complained to the Council that Mr Y was claiming a personal budget for C but was not using it for C’s benefit. She also complained about lack of action and response from the Council despite several attempts to seek assistance. She asked the Council to remove C from the Dedicated Service.
10. In response to Ms X’s complaint, the Council explained that access to the Dedicated Service was subject to strict confidentiality rules so it could not share information with her. It said that, under its current policy, Mr Y was able to make decisions about the use of any funding he was eligible for. However, the Council confirmed that her concerns about misuse of the funds were being investigated. It also said it would conduct an internal review to ensure all procedures and protocols were followed correctly.
11. Ms X was not happy with the Council’s response and escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the complaints process. In its response, the Council explained that, under its previous policy, the decision on how a personal budget was used was left to the bereaved individual/survivor and a parent was entitled to decide how to use a child’s budget. It said requests had to be made against a framework of support covering things such as health and well-being, housing and education, but, provided the parent eligible for the Dedicated Service was having regular contact with their child, they could request support for their child without further checks.
12. The Council said it had revised its policy and, in future, would seek greater evidence of regular contact and shared parental consent for provision of the service.
13. The Council told Ms X it was unable to share details of what support Mr Y received for confidentiality reasons. However, it had reviewed the information it had available and was satisfied there had been no fraudulent use of the funds.
14. The Council accepted it should have investigated Ms X’s concerns more comprehensively when she raised them and should have tried to reach an agreement between her and Mr Y about whether C should be eligible for support and how any such support should be delivered. It apologised for failing to do so. It also accepted it should have worked harder to act on Ms X’s instruction to remove C from the Dedicated Service. It confirmed it had informed Mr Y that C would no longer be eligible for support.

Back to top

Analysis

15. Under the Council’s policy in force at the time, it only needed the consent of one parent with parental responsibility to provide support to an eligible child. So, it was entitled to provide funding for C’s benefit without consulting Ms X. I therefore find no grounds to criticise the Council in this regard. However, the Council has amended its policy to prevent such issues arising in future.
16. The Council accepts it was at fault in failing to remove C from the Dedicated Service when Ms X first requested this. It has now removed C from the Service and has apologised to Ms X for the delay in doing so. I consider this represents a satisfactory remedy for the injustice caused.
17. The Council has investigated Ms X’s concerns about Mr Y’s use of funding and has confirmed it is satisfied there had been no fraudulent use of the funds. This is a decision it is entitled to reach. The Council is unable to provide Ms X with details because it is required to protect Mr Y’s confidentiality.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I find the Council was at fault in failing to act promptly on Ms X’s request to remove her child from the Dedicated Service. However, it has provided an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused.
19. I have completed my investigation on the basis that I am satisfied with the Council’s actions.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman