Summary: Miss X complained the Council wrongly decided her son did not meet the criteria for support from its Children with Complex Needs Team. She also complained the Council’s assessment contained inaccurate or misleading information. Miss X said the Council’s actions caused her avoidable distress. We found fault in how the Council handled Miss X’s complaint. However, we have not investigated Miss X’s complaint that the Council wrongly decided her son did not meet the criteria for support and that the Council’s assessment contained inaccurate information. This is because the Council has agreed to continue its investigation of these complaints via the statutory children’s complaints procedure.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about a Child and Family Assessment carried out by the Council; she said the Council wrongly decided her son did not meet the criteria for involvement from the Council’s Children with Complex Needs Team. Miss X also complained the Council’s assessment contained inaccurate or misleading information, and left out important, relevant information.
2. Miss X says the Council’s actions caused considerable avoidable distress to her and her family and resulted in the Council not providing appropriate support. Miss X would like the Council to apologise and provide her family with support. She would also like the Council to ensure it does not repeat the same actions with another family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
5. 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)
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered the information she provided.
8. I made enquiries to the Council and considered the information it provided.
9. Miss X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I have considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The statutory children’s complaints procedure

10. 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. We also published practitioner guidance on the procedures, setting out our expectations.
11. The procedure covers complaints about council’s actions under Part 3 and some of Parts 4 and 5 of the Children Act 1989, (the Act), as well as some adoption and special guardianship services. When deciding if a complaint should be considered under the procedure, councils should check which part of the Act the service being complained about falls under.
12. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond to a complaint.
13. 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 investigating officer, (IO) to look into the complaint, and an independent person, (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence.
14. Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The officer considers the IO report and any report from the IP. They decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take. The adjudicating officer should then write to the complainant with a copy of the investigation report, any report from the independent person and the adjudication response.
15. The whole stage two process should be completed within 25 working days, but guidance allows an extension for up to 65 working days where required.
16. 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.

What happened

17. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
18. In February 2024, the Council carried out a Child & Family Assessment. The assessment determined Miss X’s son, Y, did not meet the criteria for involvement from the Council’s Children with Complex Needs (CWCN) Team.
19. Shortly after, Miss X complained to the Council that the assessment was inaccurate; she complained it contained misleading information and left out important, relevant information.
20. The Council provided its stage one complaint response in early March 2024, and stated it had considered Miss X’s complaint via the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint and maintained that Y did not meet the criteria to be allocated a social worker within the CWCN Team.
21. On the following day, Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two.
22. The following week, the Council told Miss X it had investigated her concerns together with the information presented as part of the stage one response. It said it was satisfied it had explored and addressed Miss X’s concerns and said Miss X could contact the Ombudsman if she remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response.
23. Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman the following day.

What happened next

24. Following contact from the Ombudsman, the Council agreed to carry out a stage two investigation of Miss X’s complaint via the statutory children’s complaints procedure. As a result, we closed our investigation and issued a decision confirming the Council had agreed to take this action.
25. The following month, the Council told the Ombudsman it felt a stage two investigation would not change the answers it had previously provided.
26. As a result, we reopened our investigation of Miss X’s complaint and made enquiries to the Council.
27. The Council provided its enquiry response and acknowledged it should have escalated Miss X’s complaint to stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The Council said its failure to do this was an oversight. The Council said it was happy to proceed with a stage two investigation, and to appoint an IO and IP to carry this out.

Analysis

28. The statutory children’s complaints procedure was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with access to an independent, thorough and prompt response to their concerns.
29. Neither the regulations nor the guidance allow a council to refuse a stage two complaint because the council thinks there is no substance to it. The guidance says once a complaint has entered stage one, councils must ensure the complaint continues to stages two and three if the complainant wishes, except in exceptional circumstances. Councils cannot refuse to consider complaints under the statutory complaints process to avoid carrying out their duty under the process.
30. The Council has now said it will proceed with a stage two investigation under the statutory children’s complaint procedure and will appoint an IO and an IP to carry this out. Whilst I acknowledge the Council’s comments, its failure to follow the statutory complaints procedure, particularly after previously telling the Ombudsman it would undertake a stage two investigation, is fault. The injustice to Miss X is stress and frustration caused by the delay incurred by the Council as a result of not following the statutory procedure.

Miss X’s substantive complaint

31. The independence of the statutory children’s complaint procedure is not available to complaints put through the corporate complaints procedure. Because of this, we expect people to complete the statutory complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns. As a result, and as the Council has now said it will proceed with a stage two investigation via the statutory procedure, I have not investigated Miss X’s substantive complaint further.

Back to top

Agreed action

32. To address the injustice to Miss X, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide an apology to Miss X for the fault identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings;
2. Make a payment of £200 to Miss X in recognition of the stress and frustration caused;
3. Remind staff of the three-stage statutory children’s complaints procedure, (and the timeframes for each stage), for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services, as well as the accompanying statutory guidance, and our practitioner guidance on the subject.
33. The Council has also agreed to take the additional following action:
1. Complete a stage two investigation of Miss X’s complaint via the statutory children’s complaints procedure within a maximum of 65 days from the date of the final decision, ensuring it informs Miss X she may request a stage three review by an independent panel if she remains dissatisfied with the outcome of the stage two investigation;
2. If Miss X escalates her complaint to stage three, hold the stage three panel within 30 working days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 working days of the panel hearing.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

35. The Council is at fault for how it handled Miss X’s complaint. It has agreed to provide Miss X with an apology and a financial remedy, and to complete its investigation of Miss X’s substantive complaint via the statutory children’s complaints procedure within the statutory timeframes. I have therefore not investigated Miss X’s complaint that the Council wrongly decided Y did not meet the criteria for support, and that the Council’s assessment contained inaccurate and misleading information. I have concluded my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman