Summary: We find fault with the Council for delays carrying out an assessment for Mrs C. There were also delays handling her complaint. Mrs C missed out on support and experienced distress, time and trouble pursuing her complaint. The Council agrees actions to remedy the injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs C complains the Council:
• delayed providing support for her as a carer; and
• failed to reimburse the cost of a private social work assessment for D.
2. She also complains the Council delayed responding to her complaint about assessments and support.
3. Mrs C says she did not receive the support she was entitled to. This caused distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’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

7. I spoke to Mrs C and considered all the information she provided with her complaint. I made enquiries with the Council and considered its response along with relevant guidance and legislation.
8. Mrs C and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I carefully considered all the comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Children’s services statutory complaints

9. The government sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about statutory social services functions. The handling and consideration of complaints consists of three stages: Stage 1 - Local Resolution, Stage 2 - Investigation and Stage 3 - Review Panel. (Department for Education, Statutory guidance for local authority children’s services on representations and complaints procedures, 2006)
10. The local authority must send its response to the panel’s recommendations to the complainant within 15 days of receiving the panel’s report. The response should be developed by the relevant Director / Director of Children’s Services setting out how the local authority will respond to the recommendations and what action will be taken. If the local authority deviates from the panel’s recommendations it should demonstrate its reasoning in the response.

Carers assessments

11. Section 97 of the Children and Families Act 2014 requires Councils to assess parent carers on the appearance of need or where an assessment is requested by the parent.
12. The Council must assess whether the parent has needs for support and what those needs are. It must also assess whether it is appropriate for the parent to provide care for a disabled child considering the parents needs for support, other needs and wishes.

What happened

Background

13. Mrs C is the sole carer for D. D has a diagnosis of Autism, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and other medical needs. Mrs C approached the Council for support in 2012. It assessed D and he has been open to the disabled children’s service since 2012.
14. In 2019 D’s school made a child protection referral following an incident at school. The Council allocated a social worker to carry out an assessment. The assessment did not find any child protection concerns and recommended the case should be dealt with as a child in need.
15. Mrs C initially complained the social worker failed to share the assessment report with her. She says she did not receive a response and asked for it to progress to stage two.
16. In August 2019 Mrs C wrote to the Council again. She asked to progress to stage three because she had not received a response to her original complaint. She added to her complaint that the Council delayed sending D’s case to the panel for his support to be agreed. She says this left her son without the support he needed.

The statutory complaint investigation and panel

17. The Council appointed an Investigating Officer (IO) and Independent Person (IP) in December 2019. They met Mrs C and agreed her complaint and desired outcomes.
18. In March 2020 the IO issued the stage two report. It upheld two complaints, partially upheld one and did not uphold one. Mrs C was not satisfied with the stage two report and asked for her complaint to be considered at stage three.
19. The stage three panel took place in August 2020. It disagreed with some of the stage two report findings and upheld two further complaints. It made the several recommendations.
20. The Council responded to the stage three panel findings in September 2020. It agreed with most of the findings. It did not agree to reimburse Mrs C for the private social work assessment she commissioned. It apologised for the delays Mrs C experienced during the complaint process and offered a payment of £250 for her time and trouble.
21. Mrs C was unhappy with some of the Council’s response and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

22. When a case has been considered through the statutory complaint’s procedure, we generally would not reinvestigate the substantive issues. The statutory procedure is designed to provide independence and detailed analysis of concerns raised. This means reinvestigation is neither necessary nor warranted, unless there are serious and fundamental flaws in the way the case was investigated.
23. I do not have any concerns about the statutory complaint’s procedure. I have not reinvestigated the substantive issues. My investigation focussed on the issues Mrs C remained unhappy with.
24. I have summarised my findings under Mrs C’s outstanding complaints.

Delays in the complaint process

25. The stage two investigation upheld Mrs C’s complaint the Council took too long to address Mrs C’s complaint. It took three months to register the complaint under the statutory procedure.
26. The Council has apologised for the delays and offered a payment of £250 for the time and trouble Mrs C experienced pursuing her complaint.
27. This is a suitable remedy for the injustice, and I have nothing further to add to this part of the complaint.

There was a delay assessing and providing support for Mrs C

28. I find fault with the Council for a delay assessing Mrs C following the stage three panel.
29. The stage three panel recommended the Council discussed a carer’s assessment with Mrs C. This was completed in January 2021 and Mrs C was offered additional support.
30. There was a delay of six months between the stage three panel recommendation and the meeting with Mrs C, which resulted in additional support. The way the Council communicated about the carers assessment after the panel was confusing and contributed to the delay.
31. This delay meant Mrs C missed out on additional support she was entitled to. The Council should remedy this by backdating the support to the date of the stage three panel decision.
32. The Council disagrees with my findings in relation to Mrs C’s carers assessment. It said:
• Mrs C’s needs as a carer have always been considered.
• It responded to the stage three panel recommendation and wrote to Mrs C about the carer’s assessment.
• It met Mrs C in January 2021 and discussed the panel recommendations. After the meeting the support package for Mrs C was increased to include additional respite support.
• It does not think there was an unreasonable delay in assessing Mrs C as a carer.
33. The Council accepts the letter it sent to Mrs C after the stage three panel could have been clearer. It could have told Mrs C to contact adult services for an assessment of her own needs.

Mrs C had to fund a private social work assessment

34. I do not find fault with the Council for refusing to pay for the private social work assessment.
35. Mrs C said she had to fund a private social work assessment for D because the Council failed to give her a copy of the assessment it carried out in 2019. Mrs C also said the Council used the content of the assessment when it assessed D after the stage three panel.
36. The stage three panel recommended the Council consider reimbursing Mrs C for the assessment.
37. The Council said:

“This assessment was not required as the Local Authority have their own mechanism to assess and review packages of support. The Local Authority did consider the contents of the independent social work assessment when undertaking its own assessment, as it would be remiss to ignore information that was presented. However, the Local Authority’s assessment reached its own conclusions. The Local Authority remain of the view, that although the content of the assessment was considered, they do not share Mrs C’s view that they should pay for the assessment in retrospect, nor that this concurs with Mrs C’s view that an independent report was required”.

38. The Council considered the panels recommendation but explained why it did not feel it should pay for the assessment. I agree that once the assessment had been carried out it would have been remiss of the Council not to consider the content in its own assessment. This does not mean the Council should have to pay for a private assessment it did not agree to.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. Within one month of my final decision the Council agrees to:
• Pay Mrs C £250 for the time and trouble she experienced pursuing her complaint.
• Backdate Mrs C carers support payment to the date of the stage three panel.
40. Within two months of my final decision the Council agrees to remind staff dealing with children’s services complaints:
• Which complaints should be considered using the statutory process.
• The importance of adhering to the timeframes set out in the statutory guidance.
41. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence it has completed the agreed actions.

Back to top

Final decision

42. I find fault with the Council causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman