Summary: The Council failed to consider Ms X’s complaint through the correct statutory complaint procedure. This delayed the Council’s consideration of Ms X’s complaint, causing her uncertainty and frustration. The Council should apologise, consider Ms X's complaint through the correct procedure and make a payment to Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to put suitable social care provision in place to meet her son, Y’s needs from September 2024 onwards. She says this resulted in Y missing out on social care provision. Ms Y wants the Council to compensate her for the impact of the missed provision. She also wants the Council to review its processes for assessing children’s social care needs and commission training for its staff.

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(1), 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 Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms 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

7. 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.
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. 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.

Background

13. Ms X has made several complaints to the Council over her child, Y’s, social care provision. We previously found fault with the Council for not considering Ms X’s complaint through the children’s statutory complaint process. The Council subsequently considered Ms X’s complaint through the process, looking at events up to January 2024.

What happened

14. In May 2025 Ms X made a new complaint to the Council about Y’s social care provision. She said it had failed to put social care provision in place from September 2024 onwards.
15. The Council considered the complaint through its corporate complaint process and responded at stage one of the process in October 2025. It said it was delivering most of Y’s provision but accepted there were times when the entirety of the provision was not in place. Ms X remained unhappy and asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two of its complaint process.
16. In November 2025 the Council refused to escalate Ms X’s complaint to stage two. It said it had accepted Y’s provision had not always been in place and a stage two consideration would not change the issue of locating agencies to deliver the provision. It directed Ms X to the Ombudsman.

My findings

17. The statutory children’s complaints procedure is not optional. It 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. This independence is not available to complaints put through the corporate complaints procedure. Because of this, we expect councils to adhere to the process.
18. The Council considered Ms X’s complaint through its corporate complaints process. This was fault. The Council was fully aware of the process and had previously been found at fault for not considering Ms X’s earlier complaint through the process. The Council’s repeated failure to consider the complaint through the children’s statutory process has caused Ms X significant uncertainty and frustration and delayed proper consideration of her new complaint.

Back to top

Action

19. Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Ms X for the uncertainty and frustration caused by the Council’s refusal to consider her complaint through the statutory process. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
2. Consider Ms X’s complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaint process, ensuring it keeps to the timescales set out in the process. The Council should consider events from September 2024 to date to ensure no further delay in considering Ms X’s entire complaint. If Ms X remains unhappy with the stage two adjudication the Council should consider the complaint at stage three of the statutory process unless the criteria for early referral to the Ombudsman are met.
3. Pay Ms X £500 to recognise the significant uncertainty and frustration of repeatedly failing to consider her complaint through the statutory process.
20. We publish the Complaint Handling Code which sets out best practice in how councils should deal with complaints. In this case, we found the Council at fault because it failed to consider Ms X’s complaint through the statutory complaint procedure. In the last three months we have found the Council at fault two other times for failing to consider complaints through the correct procedure. Within three months, in order to prevent similar faults from happening in future, the Council will consider our guidance and tell us what action(s) it will take to improve the way it deals with complaints. It will also share this with the relevant council committee.
21. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman