Summary: Mr X complains about the actions of children services with regards to his son. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint at stage 2 of the statutory complaint procedure but refused to consider the complaint at stage 3. The Council said this was because Mr X did not request the Council escalate to stage 3 within 20 working days. We find fault with the Council for failing to advise Mr X of the timescales to escalate his complaint. The Council has agreed to consider Mr X’s complaint at stage 3.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s involvement with his son. He complains:
• Children services failed to act on information that his son took live ammunition into his school.
• Failed to address concerns raised about neglect.
• Failed to complete the single assessment appropriately, and as a result, were unaware of the long history of neglect.
• Children services failed to contact him and make him aware of their involvement. Mr X said the service had been involved for nine months before they contacted him
2. Mr X also complains about the actions of the social worker. He says the social worker failed to deal with concerns that his son’s mother had caused physical harm to his son. He also complains the social worker failed to comply with a court order as they did not include concerns raised by his son’s aunt in their Section 7 report.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’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)
5. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
7. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
8. I sent a draft decision to Mr X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Statutory complaints procedure

9. There is a formal procedure, set out in law, which the Council must follow to investigate certain types of complaint. There are three stages:
• Local resolution by the Council (stage 1);
• The Council appoints an independent investigator and an independent person (who is responsible for overseeing the investigation). The Council then issues an adjudication letter which sets out its response to the findings.
• An independent panel to consider the complaint (stage 3)
10. Statutory guidance states that where stage 2 of the complaint procedure has been concluded and the complainant is still dissatisfied, they will be eligible to request further consideration of the complaint by a review panel. The purpose of the review panel is to consider the complaint and where possible work towards a resolution. The panel will also:
• listen to all parties;
• consider the adequacy of the stage 2 investigation;
• obtain further information and advice that may help resolve the complaint to all parties’ satisfaction;
• focus on achieving resolution for the complainant by addressing their clearly defined complaints and desired outcomes;
• reach findings on each of the complaints being reviewed; and
• recommend any service improvements for action by the authority.
11. Statutory guidance notes the Council’s adjudication response must contain details of the complainant’s right to have the complaint submitted to a review panel if they are dissatisfied. The letter must inform the complainant they have 20 working days to make the request to the council.
12. If a council has investigated a complaint under this procedure, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it, unless he considers the investigation was flawed. However, we may consider whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation and review panel.

Back to top

What happened

13. In 2018, the Council’s children services were involved with Mr X’s son, Z, whilst he was in the care of his mother. Mr X was unhappy with how the Council dealt with the case and raised a complaint.
14. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint at stage 1. Mr X was unhappy with the response and asked the Council to escalate his complaint to stage 2 of the statutory complaint procedure.
15. The Council completed its stage 2 investigation in June 2019. The stage 2 investigation considered six complaints of which two were upheld, two partially upheld, and two not upheld.
16. The Council provided its adjudication letter to Mr X at the end of June 2019. The Council accepted the findings and recommendations of the stage 2 investigation. The letter set out that if Mr X remain dissatisfied, he should contact the Council’s complaints team by phone or email who will then advise him how to progress his complaint. The letter did not set out that Mr X had 20 working days to make his request.
17. In December 2019, Mr X contacted the Council with his response to the stage 2 investigation. Mr X was unhappy with the investigation as he felt the independent investigator had not investigated his complaint appropriately. Mr X was unhappy that some of his complaints were not upheld. Mr X asked the Council to progress his complaint to the next stage of the complaints procedure. Mr X also raised new complaints specifically about the social worker who dealt with the case.
18. Mr X explained there was a delay in providing his response to the stage 2 investigation as he had received a lot information from a subject access request. Mr X said he needed time to review the information before responding.
19. The Council wrote to Mr X and refused to review his complaint at stage 3. The Council said a stage 3 review does not re-investigate the points of complaint and does not consider new points of complaint. The Council said the timescale for progressing a stage 3 review was 20 working days. The Council said it understood Mr X wanted to review the information but did not consider it would have prevented a request for a stage 3 review.
20. The Council also refused to consider the new complaints raised by Mr X as it considered they were substantially the same as those investigated at stage 2. It did not consider a further investigation necessary or appropriate.
21. In response to our enquiries, the Council accepted the stage 2 investigation did not refer to the specific complaints raised by Mr X in December 2019. The Council said it would complete a further investigation and ensure it fully considers the specific examples.

Analysis

22. Statutory guidance states the purpose of the stage 3 panel review is to consider the adequacy of the stage 2 investigation and to focus on achieving resolution for the complainant.
23. Mr X was unhappy with the outcome of the stage 2 investigation and felt the investigation was not completed appropriately. I am satisfied Mr X’s request for a stage 3 review was in line with the statutory guidance. Therefore, it would have been appropriate for the Council to review Mr X’s complaint at stage 3 of the statutory complaint procedure.
24. Statutory guidance also states the Council’s adjudication response must contain details of the complainant’s right to have the complaint submitted to a review panel if they are unhappy with the stage 2 outcome. The letter must tell the complainant they have 20 working days to make the request.
25. In this case, the Council’s adjudication letter did not tell Mr X of the 20 working days timescale. This is fault.
26. I consider the fault identified caused Mr X an injustice because, on balance, it is more likely than not Mr X would have submitted his request within the time limit had he been aware of it. This meant Mr X lost his opportunity for his complaint to be considered at stage 3.
27. Mr X also submitted new complaints about the social worker in December. Having reviewed the complaints, I am satisfied these are new complaints which have not been addressed by the stage two investigation. The Council has agreed to investigate these complaints.

Agreed action

28. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following:
• Apologise to Mr X for failing to advise him of the 20 working days time limit.
• Arrange and hold a stage 3 review panel to consider Mr X’s complaint in line with the statutory guidance.
• Review the stage 2 adjudication letter template and ensure it contains information about the 20 working days time limit to submit a stage 3 request.
• Investigate Mr X’s two new complaints about the social worker.
29. The Council should complete the above within six weeks of the final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I find fault with the Council for failing to advise Mr X of the 20 working days time limit. The Council has agreed to my recommendations. Therefore, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman