Summary: Mrs X complained about delays in how the Council considered her complaint about its adoption service. The Council was at fault for significant delays in arranging an independent stage three panel. This caused Mrs X frustration and meant she had to go to avoidable time and trouble. The Council will pay Mrs X £300 in recognition of that injustice. It will also promptly arrange the stage three panel hearing and carry out staff training.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about delays in how the Council considered her complaint about its adoption service. Mrs X said this was distressing and frustrating.

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. 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)
3. 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)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered:
• all the information Mrs X provided and discussed the complaint with her;
• the Council’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided; and
• the relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
6. Mrs X and the organisation 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

Relevant law and guidance

7. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail.
• The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
• If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.
• If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel. The council must hold the panel within 30 working days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 working days of the panel hearing.
8. The Ombudsman would normally expect a council and complainant to follow the full complaints procedure. The guidance sets out the circumstances in which a council can refer a complaint to the Ombudsman without completing all three stages. This can only happen when the stage two investigation is robust with all complaints upheld. Councils must show they agree to meet most of the complainant’s desired outcomes and have a clear action plan for delivery.
9. On the other hand, a complainant can approach the Ombudsman at any time in the procedure. We would consider the individual circumstances of the complainant before deciding to accept a complaint before the review panel stage had been completed. We might accept a complaint earlier if, for example, there was such a significant breakdown in trust between the complainant and the Council that it would make it difficult to complete the complaints procedure.

What happened

10. Mrs X complained to the Council in January 2020 about how it considered her and her husband’s applications to adopt a child.
11. The Council issued the outcome of the stage two children’s statutory complaint process investigation in July 2021. The investigation upheld thirteen of Mrs X’s complaints and six were partially upheld or not upheld. Some of the upheld complaints related to the Council's handling of Mrs X’s complaint, including:
• there had been significant delays in the Council's consideration of their complaint; and
• the Council initially gave wrong information about how it could respond to the complaint.
12. The investigation also upheld some of Mrs X’s complaints about the adoption process. The Council agreed to offer Mrs X £200 for the time and trouble she had been to, £300 for stress and anxiety and £200 for the fault identified in the investigation.
13. Mrs X remained unhappy and asked to escalate the complaint to stage three in early-August 2021.
14. 29 working days later, in mid-September, the Council offered Mrs X some dates for a virtual panel hearing in late October; during half-term. It offered those dates because Mrs X had said it was difficult to meet during working hours in school time. Mrs X did not reply until late October, when she asked for the hearing to be held face to face.
15. In early November, the Council told Mrs X the panel chair was not comfortable meeting face to face due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It suggested either delaying the panel hearing until COVID-19 levels dropped, or it could contact other chairs.
16. Mrs X agreed to delay the hearing until it could be held face to face and asked for a date in the new year.
17. In May 2022, the Council apologised for the delay and offered Mrs X £100 in recognition of it. It said it would check if a face to face hearing was possible and asked for dates Mrs X could attend the hearing in mid-July. Mrs X did not accept the payment or respond to the request for dates.
18. The Council updated Mrs X again in July 2022 and said it was still waiting to hear from the chair and panel members on whether they would attend face to face. It asked Mrs X to confirm which dates in September and October she would not be able to attend a hearing. It also suggested Mrs X come to the Ombudsman as an early referral given the delay.
19. Mrs X responded in late July to say she was unhappy about the wait and the suggestion of an early referral. She did not respond to the request for dates.
20. The Council replied in mid-September. It said it felt an early referral was justified because of the delay and because it felt there had been a breakdown in the relationship between it and Mrs X.
21. I have reviewed the emails between Mrs X and the Council. The above chronology is a summary of events and does not include all the contact between them. Although there is some frustration evident in the emails, both parties continued to communicate throughout the course of the complaint.

Findings

Fault

22. The Council was at fault for significant delay in arranging the stage three panel hearing. The guidance says councils must arrange and hold hearings within 30 working days. Mrs X requested the stage three in August 2021 and by the time she complained to the Ombudsman in September 2022, the Council had not yet confirmed a date for the stage three. Although some of the delay was out of the Council's control, overall, it did not take sufficient steps or act decisively enough to arrange the meeting.
23. The Council ultimately tried to make an early referral to the Ombudsman because of the delay and a breakdown in communication with Mrs X. The guidance is clear on the grounds for an early referral; it is when the stage two investigation is robust and all complaints have been upheld. Delay is not a valid reason.
24. I also do not agree the relationship between Mrs X and the Council broke down to such an extent that it was impossible for the Council to carry out the stage three panel. The Council and Mrs X continued to communicate about the complaint up until the point Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman and the Council could have continued to make efforts to carry out the stage three review. The Council was therefore at fault for trying to make an early referral to the Ombudsman without valid reason.

Injustice

25. The faults described above caused Mrs X frustration and meant she went to avoidable time and trouble pursuing the complaint. To finish the complaint process, the Council should arrange the hearing promptly and complete the stage three review without undue delay.
26. The Council offered Mrs X £100 for the delay in arranging the stage three panel. Given the amount of delay the Council was responsible for and that Mrs X was required to complain to the Ombudsman, £100 is not a sufficient remedy for her injustice. I have therefore recommended a larger amount in paragraph 27.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will pay Mrs X £300 in recognition of the frustration and time and trouble she experienced due to the faults I identified.
28. By the end of January 2023, the Council will hold the stage three panel hearing. It should arrange this by offering Mrs X at least four suitable dates for either a virtual or a face to face hearing.
29. Within three months of the date of the final decision, the Council will carry out training with the relevant staff on its duties under the statutory children’s complaints procedure, including when a complaint is eligible for early referral to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice and prevent reoccurrence of this fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman