Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay in the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and the injustice caused is not so significant as to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains that the Council has delayed responding to his complaint about the Council’s children’s services actions in response to a safeguarding concern it received.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
7. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s Stage 1 response, they can ask that it is considered at Stage 2. 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 2 of the process.
8. The Council’s Stage 1 response was sent to Mr X on time and was therefore not subject to delays. As he was unhappy with the response Mr B asked for his complaint to be escalated to Stage 2 of the procedure.
9. The Stage 2 investigation has not yet concluded. There has been a relatively short delay of around three weeks. The Council argues that the delay was unavoidable because it was caused by an outbreak of COVID-19, meaning the case had to be reallocated, delaying the investigation by about a month. The Council have said that the Independent Officer is currently writing their report which will be shared with Mr X as soon as it is ready.
10. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault, given the exceptional circumstances that led to his complaint being reallocated which caused the delay. Furthermore, I consider that the delay has been relatively short so far and this has not caused Mr X a significant injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of and any injustice is not significant enough to warrant out involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman