Summary: Mrs B complains about how the Council treated her and her partner when their child was born. This was due to her previous involvement with the Council about concerns for the care of her older children. The Council would not consider her complaint about the matter. The Council was at fault for not considering Mrs B’s complaint. The Council will apologise to Mrs B and consider her complaint through the children’s statutory complaint procedure.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains about how the Council treated her and her partner when their child was born. This was due to her previous involvement with the Council about concerns for the care of her older children.
2. Mrs B says she and her partner have not been able to enjoy being parents and she feels as though her life has been invaded by the Council. She does not want the Council to consider her ability to care for her child based on historic concerns.

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 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)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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 our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I read Mrs B’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
7. I considered information provided by Mrs B and the Council.
8. Mrs B and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail. We also published practitioner guidance on the procedures, setting out our expectations.
10. The guidance sets out what matters a council should consider through the statutory process. Complaints about a council’s decisions or actions under section 17 and section 20 of the Children Act 1989 should be considered through the statutory procedure.
11. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
12. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigating officer to look into the complaint and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence. A senior manager at the council should consider the investigating officer’s report and any report from the independent person and decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take.
13. If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel.

Public Law Outline

14. The Public Law Outline (PLO) sets out the duties councils have when, for example, they are considering taking a case to court to ask for a care order to take a child into care. This is often described as initiating public law care proceedings. The PLO is what a council must do before it takes a matter to court, it is not court action itself.

Child in Need Plan

15. When a council assesses a child as being in need, it supports them through a Child in Need plan. This should set clear, measurable outcomes for the child and expectations for their parent. Councils should review Child in Need plans regularly. (Children Act 1989, section 17)

Child protection

16. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)

Section 20 accommodation

17. Under section 20 of the Children Act 1989, councils must provide accommodation to certain children in need in their area. Section 20 is used to accommodate children who are unable to live with their parents. Section 20 agreements do not have a time limit however they should not be used as a long-term solution.
18. Councils have a duty to accommodate under section 20 if:
• no one has parental responsibility for the young person;
• the young person is lost or abandoned; or
• the person who has been caring for the young person is unable to continue to provide suitable care and accommodation.

What happened

19. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
20. Mrs B has a child, C, who was born in late 2023. Before C was born, the Council became involved with Mrs B and her partner and made S47 enquiries. It decided C should be placed on a Child in Need plan, and later decided it would begin the PLO process due to historic concerns about Mrs B and her ability to care for a child. It then put in place a section 20 arrangement for Mrs B, her partner, and C to be accommodated by it in a mother and baby unit placement for a 12-week parenting assessment to take place. After the placement, the Council decided in April to end the PLO process. C remained on a Child in Need plan, due to positive progress and the parenting assessment concluding C could remain in the care of Mrs B and her partner, with other supports in place.
21. Mrs B complained to the Council in early May 2024. She said:
• the Council decided when C was born she would be subject to a Child in Need plan, but it later decided to start the PLO process. Mrs B said she and her solicitors were confused as it is not known to start the PLO process if a child is not on a Child Protection plan;
• she felt she and her partner were made to go to a placement which they did not want to do. They felt as though they had no choice, so they agreed;
• there were many home visits by social workers and she felt as though they were invading their family life; and
• she and her partner had done everything the Council had asked yet they felt the Council was judging them based on her past involvement with it.
22. The Council responded to Mrs B’s complaint shortly after. It said:
• it could not progress a complaint as legal proceedings (PLO) were in progress;
• the concerns she had raised were not separable from matters being considered through the legal process and matters subject to legal proceedings are excluded from the complaint procedure;
• Mrs B should access free legal advice about the PLO process and raise any concerns about it through this route;
• it would share her concerns with the relevant team manager for awareness; and
• Mrs B could contact the Ombudsman.
23. On 23 May 2024, the Council held a review PLO meeting which Mrs B and her partner attended. The Council told them it had decided to end the PLO process due to positive progress and the outcome of the parenting assessment. It said it would therefore not be issuing court proceedings and C would instead remain subject to a Child in Need plan for continuing support.
24. In response to my enquiries the Council told us it was of the view the crux of Mrs B’s complaint was the PLO process continuing with no new concerns, so it thought the entire complaint was about matters which were subject to legal processes and professional social work opinion.

Analysis

25. The Council refused to consider Mrs B’s complaint on the basis the PLO process was in progress. The Council decided it would end the PLO process before Mrs B raised her complaint with the Council in May 2024. So when it responded to her complaint, it should have told Mrs B that she could contact the Council again once the PLO process had ended so it could later consider her complaint. The Council didn’t do this. This was fault. This has caused Mrs B avoidable time and trouble.
26. Mrs B raised a complaint about the Council’s actions in relation to the care of C, which included a section 20 arrangement and the Child in Need process under section 17. These are matters covered by the children’s statutory complaint procedure and so the Council should have considered it through that procedure.
27. The children’s statutory complaint procedure was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with access to an independent, thorough, and prompt response to their concerns. Because of this, we expect councils to complete the complaints procedure. I have therefore not investigated Mrs B’s complaint to the Council about how it treated her and her partner about the care of C.

Back to top

Agreed actions

28. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mrs B and the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following actions within four weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mrs B for the injustice caused to her by the Council’s fault. This should be in accordance with the Ombudsman’s guidance Making an effective apology.
• Begin an investigation of Mrs B’s complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaint procedure, ensuring it meets the timescales as set out in the procedure.
29. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mrs B’s complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mrs B. The action it has agreed to take is sufficient to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman