Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council delayed assessing their child, Y, completed an inadequate assessment and then wrongly accused them of abandonment. They say the Council has failed to take appropriate action to put things right. The Council accepts it was at fault. It should apologise to Y and place a copy of the apology on its records. It should also make a payment to Mr and Mrs X to recognise the distress caused.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complained the Council delayed assessing their child, Y, completed an inadequate assessment and then wrongly accused them of abandonment. After it accepted it was at fault the Council failed to take appropriate action to put things right. Mr and Mrs X say the Council has caused them significant distress. They want the Council to compensate them, apologise to Y and put a copy of the letter on Y’s file.

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 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)
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 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

5. I have discussed the complaint with Mr and Mrs X and considered the information they provided. I have also considered information provided by the Council.
6. Mr and Mrs X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Child in Need

7. The Children Act 1989, section 17, requires councils to safeguard and promote the welfare of ‘children in need’ in their area, including disabled children, by providing appropriate services for them. All disabled children are regarded as ‘children in need’ and entitled to an assessment under section 17. Assessments should take account of the needs of the whole family.

What happened

8. Mr and Mrs X adopted their teenage child, Y, at birth. Y is a child in need. Y struggles to regulate themselves and needs significant support. Y attends a residential special school for children and young people with complex learning needs and associated social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. In 2023 Y stayed at the school for around 38 weeks a year and returned home at other times.
9. At a child in need review in May 2023 Mr and Mrs X told the Council they were struggling to care for Y when they returned home. The Council agreed to request extra nights for Y at school and to explore extra support for the family when Y returned home.
10. Y’s social worker began an assessment in September 2023 and completed the assessment in November 2023. Mr and Mrs X were not asked to contribute to the assessment. The assessment said the social worker would ask the Council to increase Y’s care at school, beginning with 15 extra nights at school over the Christmas holidays.
11. A Council panel considered the request on 20 December 2023. The panel decided it wanted a further assessment of Y’s time at home but noted the lateness of the request. It agreed to eight extra nights over the Christmas holidays.
12. Mr and Mrs X told the Council they would not collect Y from school as they did not feel they could meet Y’s needs. The Council told Mr and Mrs X this was “abandonment”. Mr and Mrs X said the Council’s delay in assessing Y meant they received inadequate support over Christmas. They objected to the word “abandonment”.
13. The Council met with Mr and Mrs X in January 2024. It accepted it had delayed in assessing Y and bringing the request to its panel. It said it should have assessed Y in May 2023. It repeated that Mr and Mrs X had abandoned Y as there was no prior agreement for Y to remain at the school. The Council said it would allocate Y a new social worker and carry out a new assessment to decide the best arrangements for the future.
14. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Council. The Council responded in February 2024. It accepted its November assessment of Y was delayed and inadequate. It said it had failed to allow Mr and Mrs X to contribute to the assessment and failed to have managerial oversight of the assessment. It said its use of the word abandonment was not appropriate and inaccurate. It apologised to Mr and Mrs X and said it would learn from the complaint. Mr and Mrs X asked the Council to place a letter on Y’s file reflecting its mistake and apology.
15. A new social worker carried out a new assessment in March 2024. They said it would be harmful to Y to allow any potential future breakdown in care to happen and recommended a well-planned increase in Y’s care at school.
16. In April 2024 the Council agreed to pay Mr and Mrs X £500 to recognise the impact of its failings on them. It said it was not necessary to place a letter on Y’s file that addressed its use of abandonment as its complaint response made its position clear. Mr and Mrs X continued to complain. They said the Council’s financial offer was not enough and they wanted a letter placed on Y’s file. The Council responded at stage two of its complaint process. It said it would also refund Mr and Mrs X’s legal fees for the advice they had sought because of their complaint but said there was no need to place a letter on Y’s record. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

17. In its complaint response the Council accepted it delayed assessing Y and its assessment was inadequate. It also accepted its use of the word abandonment was inappropriate and inaccurate. This was fault.
18. The Council says it does not need to place a letter on Y’s file to reflect this as its complaint response does. Mr and Mrs X have explained that Y’s complex needs can make it difficult for them to understand things. They say Y was abandoned at birth and they want Y to clearly understand what happened when they have access to their records.
19. A child’s records should be legible, coherent and well-ordered and enable them to understand their family background and events that took place. While the Council has apologised to Mr and Mrs X there is no record of it apologising to Y. I therefore consider it appropriate for the Council to apologise to Y and place a copy of that apology on their record.
20. We do not offer compensation in the way a court might. We can recommend payments to acknowledge the distress of difficulties a person was put through as result of fault by the Council. Our published guidance on remedies explains our remedies need to be proportionate, appropriate, and reasonable. The Council has offered Mr and Mrs X £500 to recognise the impact of its failings. This is in line with our guidance on remedies.

Back to top

Agreed action

21. Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Y. 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. In particular, the apology should be in a manner that is suitable for Y’s age and capacity, and which takes account of any disability related adjustments.
2. Pay Mr and Mrs X the £500 it originally offered to recognise the distress caused by its failing.
3. Refund Mr and Mrs X’s legal fees.
22. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation, finding fault, which the Council has agreed to remedy.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman