Summary: We find no fault with the way the Council investigated Mr X’s concerns about neglect and emotional abuse to his children. The Council investigated his complaints thoroughly and did not uphold his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has not properly acted on his complaints and concerns about neglect and emotional abuse to his children. He said the Council has not protected his children.
2. Mr X said this has impacted his mental health and caused anxiety and worry.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information and documents provided by Mr X and the Council. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint. I considered the relevant legislation and statutory guidance, set out below.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments and further information received before I reached a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

8. 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.
9. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At stage two, councils appoint an investigating officer (IO) to look into the complaint and an independent person (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence.
10. Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The officer considers the IO’s report and any report from the IP. They decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take. The adjudicating officer should then write to the complainant with a copy of the investigation report, any report from the independent person and the adjudication response.
11. The whole stage two process should be completed within 25 working days but guidance allows an extension for up to 65 working days where required.
12. 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. The council must hold the panel within 30 working days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 working days of the panel hearing.
13. The statutory children’s complaints 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, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it.
14. However, we may look at whether there were any flaws in the stage two investigation or stage three review panel that could call the findings into question. We may also consider whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation and review panel, and whether it has completed any recommendations without delay.

What happened

15. Mr X complained to the Council about neglect and emotional abuse to his children. The Council took his complaint straight to stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure.
16. The investigating officer (IO) did not uphold Mr X’s complaint. They made no recommendations. The Council agreed. Mr X did not. He asked for stage three.
17. The stage three review panel agreed with the IO and the Council, and did not uphold Mr X’s complaints. However, the panel recommended the Council meet with Mr X to discuss his concerns. It recommended the Council tell Mr X how it would make sure it got and considered his children’s wishes and views. The panel also recommended the Council consider sharing one of the children’s concerns with their school. The Council agreed to these recommendations.
18. Mr X then complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

19. I have considered the stage two investigation. I find it was thorough, well-balanced and proportionate. I find no flaws in the investigation. I have also considered the stage three review panel. I find no flaws. I therefore conclude that the findings of the stage two investigation and stage three review panel are not called into question.
20. There were no recommendations at stage two for me to consider. However, I have investigated whether the Council properly considered the stage three review panel’s recommendations.
21. The panel made three recommendations.
22. The Council met with Mr X and discussed his concerns. It got Mr X’s children’s wishes and views, and shared them with him at these meetings. The Council considered sharing the child’s concerns with their school. The Council ultimately decided this was not necessary. I find no fault with the Council’s reasons for making this decision. The Council was entitled to make this decision.
23. I find the Council did not delay completing the recommendations.
24. For these reasons, I do not find fault with the Council. I therefore do not uphold Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Decision

25. I find fault no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman