Summary: After Miss B told the Council that a commissioned service’s complaints policy was inadequate – and the Council accepted this – it was at fault for waiting 10 months before taking action. The policy is also still in place. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss B and take further action in relation to the policy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Miss B, complains about how the Council dealt with concerns she raised about a private provider of children’s play centres (which I refer to as ‘the Provider’).
2. The Provider delivers services on behalf of the Council.
3. Miss B specifically complains that:
• The Council has accepted that it failed to check the Provider’s complaints policy properly when it first commissioned the service (and since). But she believes there must have been other failures in the monitoring of the Provider’s procedures, and the Council has not acknowledged this.
• The Council first acknowledged in March 2022 that the Provider’s complaints policy was inadequate. But it took another 10 months – and a formal complaint from Miss B – before the Council did anything about it.
• Although the Council told the Provider to bring its complaints policy up to standard in January 2023, it has still not done so.
• The Council failed to respond to her in complaint in 2022 after being asked to do so by the Ombudsman.

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 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)
5. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
6. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. Although Miss B originally complained to us in 2022 about the actions of the Provider, the focus of her complaint is now on the Council.
8. In any event, too much time has now passed since April 2021, which is when her concerns about the Provider arose. So I would not have been able to look at them anyway.
9. I will not investigate Miss B’s complaint about what she believes are widespread problems with the Provider’s policies and procedures (and the Council’s lack of acknowledgment of these problems).
10. This is because the Council has decided the policies (apart from the complaints policy) are all up to the required standard.
11. The Ombudsman investigates complaints when there has been an alleged injustice to a specific person. We do not provide audits of organisations’ policies and procedures.
12. The decision about the adequacy of the Provider’s policies was for the Council to make, and further investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
13. I will also not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council failed to respond to her complaint in 2022 after being asked to by the Ombudsman.
14. The Council asked the Provider to respond to the complaint on its behalf, and, as the complaint was primarily about the Provider, it is unlikely that I would find fault with the Council if I investigated further.
15. Consequently, I have only considered Miss B’s complaint about the Provider’s complaints policy (and how the Council dealt with her concerns).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

16. I considered information from Miss B and the Council. Both 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

What happened

17. Miss B first contacted the Council about issues with the Provider’s complaints policy in March 2022. The Council acknowledged that the policy did not explain how someone could escalate their complaint if they were dissatisfied with the first response they received. It suggested she contact the Provider’s Board of Trustees.
18. The Council did not take any further action on this point.
19. In November 2022, Miss B contacted the Council about this again. She suggested improvements to the Provider’s complaints policy. The Council told her that any problems with the policy would be picked up by the Council’s regular monitoring of the Provider’s contract.
20. In January 2023, Miss B complained to the Council about this matter (and several others). In response, the Council accepted that the Provider’s complaints policy was inadequate. It said this should have been identified when it first commissioned the Provider.
21. The Council apologised to Miss B. It said this matter would be dealt with better in future. It said it had spoken to the Provider, which had agreed to re-draft its policy.
22. The complaints policy on the Provider’s website remains dated 2020, and there is no right of escalation explained within the policy document.

My findings

23. As the Council has accepts that did not properly monitor the Provider’s complaints policy during the commissioning or contract monitoring processes, and as it was aware of the problem with the policy 10 months before directly acknowledging this and taking remedial action, I have found that it was at fault.
24. Miss B felt she had to go to the time and trouble of making a complaint to get the Council to take action on the policy. This means she was caused an injustice.
25. However:
• Miss B also made a complaint about numerous other issues. It seems fair to assume that she still would have done so if the Council had taken immediate action on the complaints policy.
• The policy itself did not cause her a significant injustice over that 10-month period, because she had already escalated her complaint (by approaching the Trustees).
26. Consequently, the Council’s delay caused Miss B very little injustice. This can be remedied with an apology.
27. Although the Council asked the Provider to amend its policy in January 2023, the policy remains unchanged. The Council should look into this.

Back to top

Agreed actions

28. Within four weeks, the Council has agreed to:
• Write to Miss B to apologise for the 10-month delay between finding out about the Provider’s inadequate complaints policy and taking action on it, and for the time and trouble Miss B went to in raising this as a formal complaint.
• Take whatever action it deems appropriate to ensure that the Provider amends its complaints policy, as first requested by the Council in January 2023.
29. The Council has agreed to provide us with evidence it has done these things.

Back to top

Final decision

30. The Council was at fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman