Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s adoption application. There is insufficient evidence of injustice we could consider, and an investigation is unlikely to reach a significantly different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s management of her adoption application. She says this caused her distress and believes this ultimately affected whether her application was accepted.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X and her husband submitted an application to an organisation acting on behalf of the Council to be considered as potential adopters. She complains her application was not processed in timely manner, she experienced poor communication and very little support her in the application. She believes she was treated differently. She says this caused her and family distress and she believes this impacted the success her application.
6. Mrs X is unhappy with the outcome of her application and her appeal about it has been heard by the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM), which is best placed to consider the substance of the matter. It confirmed the Council’s decision. We would not be able to consider Mrs X disagreement with the decision on her application or the distress caused by the outcome.
7. Mrs X has raised some procedural concerns. The Council accepted there were some issues with delay and communication and offered Mrs X an apology. The response provided represents a proportionate outcome to the injustice caused by these service failings. It is unlikely we would seek more than the apologies already offered, and we cannot change the overall result for Mrs X.
8. Mrs X is unhappy with the Council’s response. She feels it should accept more instances of fault and improve its services. Even if the Council is at fault for additional issues there is insufficient injustice, separate to Mrs X’s disappointment at the outcome of the process and the IRM decision, to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient injustice to warrant it, and it is unlikely an investigation would result in a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman