Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it responded to Mrs X’s reports of a safeguarding risk to her children. It took short-term action to reduce the risk and then carried out an assessment to put long-term support in place for Mrs X’s family. The Council failed to follow its complaint procedure, causing Mrs X uncertainty and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise and take steps to ensure it follows its complaint procedure in future.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly respond to her and her husband’s reports of a safeguarding risk to their children in December 2024. She says this resulted in Mr X and their child, Y, having to sleep in a car, causing their family distress and impacting their mental health. Mrs X wants the Council to apologise and learn from her complaint to ensure it does not make the same mistakes again.

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. 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)
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mrs X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Law

Safeguarding and children in need

7. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is 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)
8. Harm means ill-treatment or the impairment of health or development, including, for example, impairment suffered from seeing or hearing the ill-treatment of another. (The Children Act 1989 31(9))  
9. Where a child’s need is relatively low level, individual services and universal services may be able to take swift action. Where there are more complex needs, the council may offer a service under section 17 (child in need) or section 47 (child protection) of the Children Act 1989.  

The Council’s complaint process

10. The Council operates a two-stage complaint process. It aims to respond to stage one complaints within 10 working days. If a person remains unhappy the Council will consider whether a stage two review is appropriate. If the Council decides a stage two review is not appropriate it will inform the complainant and signpost them to the Ombudsman.

What happened

11. Mr X is the father of Y and is married to Mrs X who is the mother of two daughters. Y was a child in need from 2023, following a safeguarding incident at home with one of Mrs X’s daughters. In early 2024 the Council ended their child in need plan as they were satisfied Mr and Mrs X could manage Y’s behaviour at home.
12. On 23 December 2024 the Council received a children’s social care referral concerning Y. Mr X reported that he and Y had slept in a car the previous night due to Y’s behaviour at home. Mr X said they had nowhere else to go and he was worried about what Y may do if they returned home. The Council spoke to Mrs X who said she would not have Y back in the house. She said Y had shown an explicit book to her daughter and the Council had never properly resolved the issues from 2023. The Council suggested several short-term options, including Mrs X’s daughters staying elsewhere and Y returning home and being supervised by Mr and Mrs X. Mr and Mrs X rejected these options and the Council agreed to provide Y and Mr X with a hotel room for one night. It said it would not be able to continue to provide accommodation after one night.
13. On 24 December the Council spoke to Mr X and repeated it would not fund further accommodation for Mr X and Y. It said Mr X was not homeless as he and Y had a place to live. It said Mr X could call the police if there was a serious incident at home. The Council’s records show Mr X terminated the call. The Council sent Mr X a text asking where he and Y would be staying that night but received no reply. Mr X and Y returned home. Mrs X complained to the Council. She said the Council had failed to offer her family enough support.
14. The Council allocated a social worker to Y’s case on 3 January 2025. On 6 January the Council replied to Mrs X’s complaint. It said it had now taken steps following her concerns, but it could not investigate her complaint as she did not have parental responsibility for Y. It signposted Mrs X to the Ombudsman. Mrs X replied to say she did have parental responsibility through a court order. The Council said it would pass Mrs X’s comments to a manager. Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman.
15. Mrs X called the Council on 8 January. She said she and Mr X were having to supervise all of Y’s interactions with his sisters and having to take it in turns to sleep with Y to keep them separate.
16. A social worker from the Council visited the family on 17 January 2025. They noted Y was always supervised in the home. The Council sent a further response to Mrs X’s complaint on 27 January. It reiterated that Mr X was not homeless when he contacted the Council as he had somewhere to live. It said it had recommended supervision in the home as a short-term solution over the Christmas period. It said it would complete an assessment of Mrs X’s family. It did not make a finding on Mrs X’s complaint or tell her how she could escalate her complaint to stage two.
17. Over the next few weeks, the Council carried out an assessment of the family and agreed a new child in need plan for Y.

My findings

The Council’s safeguarding response

18. The Council learned Mr X and Y had slept in a car on 23 December. It spoke to Mrs X and made several suggestions to try and resolve the situation in the short term. When it became clear none of these options would succeed, it arranged emergency accommodation for Mr X and Y. Mrs X was unhappy at some of the Council’s suggestions, but the Council was entitled to explore all options to ensure Y had a place to stay and the risk to Mrs X’s daughter was managed. The Council was not at fault.
19. The Council then decided it did not need to take immediate action and any risk over the Christmas period could be managed by Mr X and Y returning home and Y being supervised. It said Mr and Mrs X could alert the Council or the Police to any further issues. This was a decision the Council was entitled to make. There is no evidence Mrs X’s daughters were at immediate risk. The Council considered all the information and was satisfied with the short-term plan in place. The Council was not at fault. The Council has since carried out an assessment and measures have been put in place to manage any risk.

The Council’s complaint handling

20. When Mrs X complained to the Council it rejected her complaint as it said she did not have parental responsibility for Y. Mrs X does have parental responsibility for Y. This was fault, and caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty over whether the Council would respond to her complaint.
21. While the Council said it would refer Mrs X’s comments to a manager it did not provide Mrs X with a further update until its additional complaint response on 27 January. This complaint response made no findings on Mrs X’s complaint and did not inform Mrs X of her right to ask for a stage two review. This was fault. The Council failed to follow its complaint procedure, causing Mrs X further frustration and uncertainty.

Back to top

Action

22. Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X for the frustration and uncertainty caused by its failure to properly respond to her complaint. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology.
23. Within three months of the final decision the Council has agreed to review why it did not follow its complaint procedure in this case and take steps to ensure staff follow the procedure in future.
24. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice which the Council has agreed to remedy.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman