London Borough of Ealing (24 015 544)

Statement Upheld Adoption 27-May-2026

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained that the London Boroughs of Ealing, Hounslow and Southwark failed to manage properly the proposed adoptive placement with them. This led to them not having a child placed with them, as they had expected. We find some fault causing avoidable distress, grief and time and trouble for the complainants. The Councils have agreed the recommended ways to remedy their injustice, and to implement service improvements to prevent a recurrence of faults in this case. We have therefore completed our investigation and are closing the complaint.

Plymouth City Council (25 009 498)

Statement Not upheld Adoption 21-May-2026

Summary: Mr X complained about the recommendations following the statutory complaint procedure and said the Council has not completed the recommendations. Mr X said this distressed him. There was no fault in how the Council completed the statutory complaint’s procedure, so we have no grounds to question or reinvestigate its findings. The Council made a merits based decision on the content of the letter to Y and completed the actions from the statutory complaints procedure within a reasonable timescale. The Council was not at fault.

Leicestershire County Council (25 018 286)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Adoption 21-Apr-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a social worker and adoption assessment. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

West Northamptonshire Council (25 006 286)

Statement Upheld Adoption 14-Apr-2026

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s actions in relation to his adoption case. The Council was at fault as it did not investigate Mr X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure, causing uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and investigate his complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure.

Hampshire County Council (25 020 044)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Adoption 26-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council Commissioned Adoption Agency’s handling of the adoption assessment. The complaint is late, and Social Work England is better placed to consider concerns about a Social Worker’s professionalism.

Milton Keynes Council (25 016 917)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Adoption 25-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about post adoption direct and letterbox contact. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (25 016 794)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Adoption 17-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to notify him about a court hearing. This is because it concerns the Council’s conduct as part of court proceedings and raises issues that were, or could reasonably have been, considered by the court.

Bristol City Council (25 015 458)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Adoption 16-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s complaint and an assessment carried out by a social worker. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a different outcome.

Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (25 010 328)

Statement Not upheld Adoption 03-Mar-2026

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council delayed completing stage one of the adopter application process which was then refused. He said staff were unprofessional and the process caused them distress and uncertainty. We find no fault with the Council.

Nottinghamshire County Council (25 018 169)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Adoption 03-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the adoption application process. The Council has already investigated and responded to Mr X’s concerns under all three stages of the statutory complaint procedure. It has identified service failures, apologised and offered remedial action and payment for the injustice caused. Further investigation is unlikely to change the outcome or achieve anything worthwhile. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider concerns about data recording and handling.