Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly safeguard her while she was a child in care. As a result, she has suffered from trauma and multiple health issues in her adult life. Miss X also complained the Council made inappropriate entries in her care records. We will not investigate this complaint. Miss X could have raised her concerns with the Ombudsman sooner and it is unlikely we would now be able to carry out an effective investigation. It is not appropriate to exercise discretion to investigate Miss X's complaint outside the normal timeframes.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Miss X complained the Council failed to properly safeguard her while she was a child in care and made inappropriate entries in her case records. As a result, she has suffered from trauma and multiple health issues in her adult life.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by Miss X and discussed the issues with her.
5. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Miss X was under the care of the Council as a child. She says she was abused whilst in care and has struggled with this her whole life which has resulted in multiple health issues.
7. In 2019 Miss made a request for copies of her care records. She says the Council initially typed out and redacted the records and sent them to her electronically. Miss X says she found these difficult to read. Miss X told the Council in both 2020 and 2021 that she wanted to complain about the care records and her time in the Council’s care. In May 2021 the Council told Miss X that if her concerns related to her experiences growing up within children’s social services it would not be able to investigate her complaint. It explained it could only investigate matters which occurred in the last 12 months.
8. Miss X obtained paper copies of her original care records earlier this year. She says that reading these records caused her significant distress. Miss X is concerned about the way the records describe her as they suggest she consented to being sexually abused. She asserts the records show the Council failed to protect her and enabled her abuser.
9. Having read the records Miss X made a formal complaint to the Council about the failings in her care and the language used in the case records. Miss X was disgusted and distressed the Council could even suggest that a child chooses to be abused.
10. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint and acknowledged the language in the records would have been difficult to read. The Council noted the records suggest Miss X made a choice and that her relationships were consensual, whereas it would now recognise she was being sexually abused and exploited.
11. It also noted that recording in the 1980’s was totally different to today, and reflected professional practice, values, and attitudes at the time. It said the understanding around the sexual exploitation of children was poor and that practice and understanding had moved on incredibly since that time.
12. The Council confirmed it would never now use the language Miss X had read in her records and would not suggest a vulnerable teenage was in any way responsible for their own abuse. It acknowledged this did not lessen the harm Miss X had experienced and apologised. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint that her care records contained inappropriate language.
13. Miss X is not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate her complaint. Miss X would like the Council to formally acknowledge its actions and the language used in its records was wrong and should not have happened. She is unhappy the Council has blamed its failings and sought to excuse its actions on the basis they occurred in the 1980’s. Miss X asserts it is not, and never was acceptable to write such comments about a child.

Analysis

14. As set out above, we expect complainants to contact us within 12 months of them becoming aware of the problem. We can make an exception to that requirement if we think there are good grounds why the complaint was not made sooner, and we consider that we could still carry out an effective investigation. But the restriction is there because the longer ago events happened the harder it is to investigate.
15. The events complained of occurred significantly more than 12 months ago. I must therefore consider whether it is appropriate to exercise discretion to investigate the complaint outside our normal timeframes.
16. I recognise Miss X was a child at the time of the events and we would not necessarily have expected her to complain at that time. But the events took place, and the records were written more than thirty years ago. Miss X has only recently obtained copies of her records and become aware of the language used to describe her and the events taking place. And this has prompted her complain to the Council and then to the Ombudsman.
17. However, I consider Miss X could have requested copies of her care records and complained about the language used and her experiences in the care system many years ago. It was open to Miss X to pursue this decades earlier.
18. I have also considered whether we could carry out an effective investigation. There have been significant changes in the law, policies, procedures, and the understanding of child sexual exploitation since Miss X was in care. And we cannot apply current standards, guidance, or professional expectations to historical situations. I consider it would be difficult to conduct a fair and accurate investigation into matters that happened as far back as 1988. Or to reach a sound, fair and meaningful decision.
19. I also consider it would be difficult to achieve a meaningful remedy, given the length of time that has passed and the difficulty in establishing causality over longer periods of time.
20. The Council has apologised for the language used in Miss X’s care records and acknowledged it was inappropriate. It has also confirmed there has been significant learning since Miss X was in care and that such language would not be used today. I do not consider we would be able to achieve anything more than this.
21. In the circumstances, I do not consider it appropriate to exercise discretion to consider this complaint. Miss X could have raised her concerns with the Ombudsman much sooner and it is unlikely we would now be able to carry out an effective investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

22. We will not investigate this complaint. Miss X could have raised her concerns with the Ombudsman sooner and it is unlikely we would now be able to carry out an effective investigation. It is not appropriate to exercise discretion to investigate Miss X's complaint outside the normal timeframes.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman