Recent statements in this category are shown below:
Statement Upheld Adoption 18-Dec-2018
Summary: Mr and Mrs X says the Council failed to take meaningful action or provide support to their adopted daughter following incidents of self-harm. There was fault by the Council because it did not assess the support needs of Mr and Mrs X and their daughter. The Council agreed a financial remedy to reflect the injustice suffered by the family in consequence of this fault.
Statement Upheld Adoption 15-Nov-2018
Summary: Mrs C says the Council failed to communicate and work with her while it arranged foster placements for her estranged son and that it failed to investigate her complaint about these matters properly. On the evidence so far seen, the Council was at fault for unacceptable delay in the complaints process but was not otherwise at fault. The Council should pay her £250 and apologise.
Statement Not upheld Adoption 12-Nov-2018
Summary: Ms X says the Council unreasonably refused to meet a duty to investigate and compile a report for a court under the Adoption and Children Act 2002. The complaint was closed because we did not find fault by the Council.
Statement Upheld Adoption 09-Nov-2018
Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to deal properly with her post-adoption support and her complaint about the matter. The Council was at fault in the way it dealt with her complaint. It has agreed to take her complaint to stage 2 of the children's social care complaints procedure. This is a satisfactory remedy. The Ombudsman has not investigated the complaint about the post-adoption support.
Statement Upheld Adoption 08-Oct-2018
Summary: Miss B complained to the Council about issues relating to the adoption of her daughter C. The Council has agreed to put the complaint through the statutory children's complaint procedure within the recommended timescale.
Statement Upheld Adoption 05-Sep-2018
Summary: Miss X complained the Council took too long to agree her adoption allowance and respond to her complaint. She also complained about the amount the Council said was due. She said the Council had not implemented recommendations following her earlier complaint. The Council was at fault for failing to implement the recommendations and for failings in its handling of her second complaint. It correctly calculated the adoption allowance but the information it gave Miss X about this was not clear. The Council should review its processes and pay Miss X £400 for her time and trouble and the avoidable distress caused.
Statement Upheld Adoption 29-Aug-2018
Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to provide support to her family when her adoptive daughter was taken into care. There was fault by the Council as it failed to put in place any long term plan for Ms X's daughter. As a result she stayed in a children's home for two and a half years and her behaviour deteriorated as a result. This had a significant impact on Ms X's relationship with her daughter. The Council also took too long to investigate Ms X's complaint. The Council should apologise to Ms X and pay her £2100 to recognise the distress caused and reimburse her legal fees.
Statement Not upheld Adoption 17-Jul-2018
Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the Council's decision to cease financial support for Mrs Y's three adopted children.
Statement Upheld Adoption 11-Jun-2018
Summary: Ms B complained that the Council failed to continue matched financial support beyond a two-year period after she adopted three children she had previously fostered. There is no evidence that the Council agreed to continue the funding prior to the adoption or before the two-year period expired. But the Council did not properly document or explain, in 2015 or 2017, how it reached its decision that Ms B's situation was not exceptional enough to warrant continuation of the payment. The Council has now carried out a further financial assessment but has not changed its view that Ms B's situation is not exceptional
Statement Upheld Adoption 15-May-2018
Summary: Mr and Mrs B complain the Council did not provide adequate reasons for its decision they were not suitable to be adoptive parents. And the assessment went too far to be considered at stage one of the process and had moved into stage two. There was fault by the Council in the failure to give Mr and Mrs B sufficient clear and timely information, feedback and support to enable them to explore their views and presentation that were of concern to the Council. This meant the decision not to allow them to proceed to the next stage was not sound. The Council will arrange, within the next two months, for Mr and Mrs B to go through stage one again.