Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Miss X’s complaint about how the Council acted to protect her daughter. The Council has already accepted failings in all significant parts of
Miss X’s complaint, and it has offered suitable remedies for her injustice. It is unlikely that further investigation of the same issue would lead to a different outcome for Miss X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Miss X, complains about how the Council acted to protect her daughter, Y.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 we must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the council, or if further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information from Miss X and the Council. Both 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

The Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies

4. We do not punish councils in the way a court might. This means we do not award ‘damages’ or ‘compensation’.
5. Instead, we can ask a council to make a payment to ‘symbolise and acknowledge’ the distress someone suffered because of what it did wrong.   
6. If we decide it is appropriate, we normally recommend a remedy payment for distress of up to £500. But we can recommend higher payments if we decide the distress was especially severe or prolonged.

Statutory guidance on handling children’s social care complaints

7. The statutory guidance, ‘Getting the best from complaints’, sets out a three-stage procedure for complaints about certain aspects of children’s social care. However, councils can refer complainants to the Ombudsman after stage 2 of the procedure in certain circumstances.
8. For this to happen, stage 2 must have delivered:
• A robust report.
• An outcome where all significant complaints have been upheld, as have the majority of the complainant’s desired outcomes.
• A clear action plan to remedy the complainant’s injustice and, if relevant, to improve the council’s service.

What happened

The Council’s investigation into Miss X’s complaint

9. Miss X first complained to the Council in 2023. The Council responded under the first two stages of the Children Act complaints procedure. The second stage involved an independent investigation.
10. The Council accepted almost everything Miss B had complained about. It said:
• There was a significant delay providing Miss X with an assessment.
• Concerns raised by other agencies were overlooked, and Y’s father was not formally assessed. The opportunity to identify the risks he presented was missed.
• Its social work practice fell short of its professional standards.
• There was a three-month delay to its stage 1 response.

The Council’s offers to Miss X

11. The Council offered:
• An apology.
• A symbolic £500 payment to recognise any distress arising from its failings on Y’s case.
12. The Council also agreed a range of service improvements, including an expanded file audit procedure and staff training.
13. Although Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage 3 of the complaints procedure, it refused. It said all significant points of her complaint had been upheld, and there was an action plan and an agreement to meet all or most of her desired outcomes. It suggested she approach the Ombudsman.

Miss X’s complaint to the Ombudsman

14. Miss X was dissatisfied with the outcome of her complaint to the Council. She said she wanted the social workers on Y’s case to be fired. She also said she wanted compensation.

My findings

15. If a complaint has already been through the Children Act complaints procedure, this means the complainant has already had access to an independent investigation.
16. We are not an appeal stage and do not simply add another independent investigation to the previous one as a matter of course. We will not normally re-investigate such a complaint unless we have reason to believe the previous investigation was flawed in a way which disadvantaged the complainant.
17. I have considered the documents from Miss X’s complaint, and I note that:
• Each part of the complaint was considered and addressed by the Council.
• All significant parts of the complaint were upheld, and therefore there would be no benefit to Miss X in reinvestigating them.
• The Council’s reason for refusing to arrange a panel to review the complaint does not appear obviously out of step with the statutory guidance.
18. Because of this, it is unlikely I would be able to add anything significant to what the Council has already said. If I were to reinvestigate the complaint, it is also unlikely that this would lead to a substantially different outcome for the Miss X.
19. I have, however, considered whether the Council’s proposed remedies properly recognise the injustice it has caused.
20. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance outlines that we can recommend small, symbolic payments which recognise an injustice. However, we cannot order that someone receive ‘compensation’ in the way a court might.
21. The Council’s proposed financial remedy, which is part of the focus of Miss X’s complaint to us, appears in line with our guidance, particularly as – despite clear failings by the Council – it would not be reasonable to hold it responsible for, say, injuries Y sustained in a car accident. And at least some of the decisions Miss X is unhappy about were made by the family courts.
22. Although Miss X wants social workers to lose their jobs, this is outside the Ombudsman’s powers.
23. The service improvements the Council has set out appear reasonable and, in any event, service improvements are a matter for councils, not the Ombudsman. Time will tell whether they are effective.
24. In summary, I am satisfied that the Council has adequately investigated Miss X’s complaint and remedied any injustice arising from it. No further input from the Ombudsman is needed.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman