Summary: Ms X complains about the actions of the Council’s children’s services team. The Council has investigated her complaint under the children’s statutory complaint procedure, but Ms X disagrees with the findings and complains about delay in the process. Ms X says she has been caused distress and financial losses. We find fault in the actions of the Council in incorrectly using the Children’s Statutory Complaint procedure to investigate Ms X’s complaints and for delay in the process. The Council has agreed to issue an apology, pay Ms X a financial payment and complete service improvements.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the actions of the Council’s children’s services team. The Council has investigated her complaint under the children’s statutory complaint procedure, but Ms X disagrees with the findings and complains about delay in the process.
2. Ms X says she has been caused distress and financial losses.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Ms X and the Council were invited to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. 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.
9. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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

14. Ms X raised a complaint with the Council in mid-May 2022. Ms X said she was offended and disappointed by the way the Council had treated her, and it had not considered her health conditions. Ms X also said she was unhappy with the Council’s request to ask her support network to help provide support to her foster child. Ms X also complained she was uncomfortable with Council staff visiting her home and how they behaved while in her home.
15. Ms X followed up the complaint the next day and again in early June 2022 as she had not received a response from the Council.
16. The Council acknowledged Ms X’s complaint in early June 2022 and contacted Ms X in mid-June to ask to arrange a time to discuss it. Ms X responded to say she could not make the meeting and requested a copy of the complaint procedure.
17. Ms X confirmed when she would be available in an email in early July 2022 and requested a copy of the complaints procedure.
18. The Council responded in late July and apologised for the delay in responding. The Council again asked when Ms X would be available to discuss her complaint. A meeting was arranged for early August 2022.
19. Ms X contacted the Council the day before the meeting to say she could not make it as she was recovering from surgery. The Council re-arranged the meeting for mid-August 2022 but cancelled it on the day due to technical difficulties.
20. Ms X chased the Council for a response to her complaint in early September 2022.
21. The Council issued a stage one response in late September 2022 which upheld some of Ms X’s complaints but not others. The Council also apologised for the delay in issuing the response.
22. Ms X chased the council for its response in early October 2022 and the Council re-sent the response from late September.
23. Ms X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to the next stage in early October 2022. The Council responded the same day to ask Ms X to explain her reasons for escalating the complaint so these could be considered.
24. Ms X emailed the council in mid-October 2022 to ask for a copy of the complaint procedure which the Council provided the following day.
25. Ms X asked the Council for extra time to respond to the stage one complaint response in late October 2022. The Council agreed to extend the date by which Ms X should respond.
26. Ms X provided her comments on the stage one response in early December 2022.
27. Ms X agreed the statement of her complaint in late February 2023. The Council contacted Ms X in late March 2023 to say it would exceed the 25-day response time for this stage. But it anticipated Ms X would have a response by the extended 65-day date allowed in law.
28. The Council received the Investigating Officers report and Independent Person’s report in late March 2023. The Investigating Officers report referenced Ms X’s amended complaints and detailed information from both Ms X and the Council. The Investigating officers report partly upheld some of Ms X’s complaints and did not uphold others.
29. The Council issued its stage two response to Ms X in early July 2023. The response apologised for the faults the Independent Person identified in their report.
30. Ms X contacted the Council in late July 2023 to ask for extra time to respond to the stage two response as she was going on holiday. Ms X said she would respond by mid-August 2023.
31. Ms X emailed the Council in mid-August 2023 with her reply to the stage two response. Ms X said she questioned whether the Independent Person was truly independent and disagreed with the findings in the report.
32. The Council contacted Ms X a few days later to try and arrange the panel meeting for the next stage of the complaints procedure. Ms X replied towards the end of August 2023 to confirm her availability.
33. The Council contacted Ms X to try to arrange the panel meeting in mid-September 2023. However, Ms X could not make the date the Council suggested. The Council advised the panel meeting would likely have to take place in October 2023.
34. The Council arranged the panel meeting for the end of October 2023 which was the first date all parties could be available.
35. Ms X sent the Council documents she wanted to be included in the bundle in mid-October 2023. The Council confirmed it had shared these the following day.
36. The Council received the complaint review panels response in early November 2023. The Council issued its stage three adjudication letter to Ms X in early February 2023.

Analysis

37. 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. Because of this, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it. I am satisfied with the way the Council has completed its investigation. Ms X had the chance to agree her complaint and provide comments at each stage of the process. The comments she provided have been considered. I therefore have not considered the substantive issues of Ms X’s complaint.
38. However, there have been delays in the Council’s consideration of Ms X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. As explained in paragraphs nine to thirteen above Councils should respond to the complaint within defined timescales. At each stage the council significantly exceeded the expected time to respond.
39. I do acknowledge there have been times where Ms X asked for extra time or could not attend meetings and have taken this into account. However, even when doing so there have been significant delays in the Councils response times.
40. When looking across the time taken to complete the procedure there are around nine months of delays in the Council’s response. This is fault and has caused Ms X distress and frustration.
41. In its response to my enquiries the Council offered to further apologise to Ms X and pay £400 to recognise the distress caused to her. This is a suitable remedy to recognise the delays, and the distress caused.
42. The Council has also acknowledged that it should not have considered the complaint through the children’s statutory complaint procedure. It accepts the issues Ms X raised were not on behalf of a child but were her own complaints.
43. In its response to my enquiries the Council said it incorrectly logged Ms X’s complaint to be investigated under the children’s statutory complaint procedure. It said this was not realised until stage two when an independent review had already been offered to Ms X. This is fault. However, Ms X has not been disadvantaged in terms of the investigation of the complaint. Ms X has been left with the feeling that her complaint could have been concluded differently or more quickly had it not been considered under the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
44. The Council has said it has address with its staff what should be investigated under the children’s statutory complaints procedure and what should not. It has also reminded staff about updating complainants when delays occur in complaints investigations. I have therefore not made any service improvement recommendations in these areas.
45. The Council also said Ms X has said she believes inaccurate information has been recorded about her or her experiences during the complaint process. The Council has re-iterated its offer to add a statement to the record should Ms X wish to provide this to detail these.

Back to top

Action

46. Within one month of a final decision, the Council should:

• Write to apologise to Ms X for the faults 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.
• Pay Ms X £400 to recognise the distress and frustration the delays in dealing with her complaint caused to her.
• Pay Ms X a further £150 to recognise the uncertainty caused to her by dealing with her complaint under the incorrect procedure.
• In writing, remind staff of the importance of meeting timescales outlined in the children’s statutory complaint procedure.

47. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman