Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about children services’ action as we are unlikely to achieve the remedy they seek. We cannot investigate the Council’s actions during court proceedings.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council’s children services’ team response to her complaint is inadequate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
3. 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 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 organisation; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X which includes the Council’s reply to her.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s children services’ team replied to Ms X’s complaint within its Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure.
7. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services.
8. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
9. 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 (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 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. There is a third stage. But here the Council has asked for an early referral to us as it upheld the whole complaint at stage two and offered a remedy for it.
13. Ms X says the £500 offered to her and £250 to a family member who was her advocate, is not adequate. They are seeking more than £11 000.
14. Part of the complaint is about the Council’s actions whilst Court proceedings to consider the children’s care continued. We have no power to investigate that period as the Court has wide ranging powers during proceedings about who should care for children.
15. We are unlikely to achieve the result Ms X seeks. Where a remedy takes the form of a payment, we often recommend a modest amount whose value is intended to be largely symbolic, rather than purely financial. It is not our role to assess economic losses or award compensation. Such claims would be more appropriately addressed through action in the civil courts.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we cannot look at the Council’s actions during court proceedings. And we are unlikely to achieve the remedy they seek.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman