Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Fostering


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • City of Wolverhampton Council (21 008 835)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 08-Dec-2021

    Summary: we discontinued our investigation into Mrs X's complaint that the Council did not offer her suitable fostering placements for a year. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to communicate with her when a child placed in her care went missing. The Council has offered a remedy which Mrs X has accepted, and the other part of her complaint is late.

  • Kent County Council (21 000 800)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 12-Oct-2021

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain the Council made a wrong decision about their application to become foster parents. We found the Council treated Mr and Mrs X unfairly which resulted in a flawed decision to refuse their application. The Council has accepted fault and has now offered to proceed with the application to the next stage. That said, Mr and Mrs X still suffered an injustice and so we have recommended a number of remedies.

  • North Yorkshire County Council (20 013 082)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 05-Oct-2021

    Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her as a foster carer eventually causing her to resign. We have found fault by the Council as it delayed starting the statutory stage 2 complaint investigation into her concerns. But this has not caused a significant injustice to Ms X so we have completed our investigation.

  • West Sussex County Council (20 008 710)

    Statement Not upheld Fostering 16-Sep-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's failure to pay her the correct fostering allowance since 2015 and its decision to partially backdate an increase allowance. We are satisfied the Council acted without fault when it decided to backdate her increased allowance to March 2020 only.

  • Essex County Council (21 001 926)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 08-Sep-2021

    Summary: We uphold Mr X and Mrs Y's complaint. Essex County Council delayed handling their complaint at stage two of the children's statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to complete its stage two investigation. It will offer to make Mr X and Mrs Y a payment to remedy the time and trouble its delay caused them.

  • Manchester City Council (20 010 606)

    Statement Not upheld Fostering 03-Sep-2021

    Summary: Miss B complained about the actions of the Council when she and her partner, Mr C were foster carers. We cannot find fault with the actions the Council took.

  • London Borough of Croydon (20 005 546)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 27-Aug-2021

    Summary: Miss Y complained about the way the Council dealt with issues relating to her role as a foster carer. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council in the time taken to complete its complaint handling process, causing injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy this by making a payment to reflect the time and trouble this fault caused Miss Y.

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (20 008 861)

    Statement Not upheld Fostering 18-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr and Mrs P complain about their de-registration as foster carers. The Council has properly considered their complaint and there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to question the outcome.

  • Herefordshire Council (20 010 493)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 13-Aug-2021

    Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it handled Mr X and Mrs Z's fostering placement. Had the Council provided them with all the relevant information before the placement began they would not have agreed to proceed. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and Mrs Z and make a payment to recognise the distress caused.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (20 002 666)

    Statement Upheld Fostering 09-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed in its statutory duty to provide her with support as a foster carer. She also says the Council failed to pay her in line with the relevant guidance and failed to properly deal with her complaint. She says these faults caused her an injustice because she felt unsupported throughout her time as a foster carer and was paid significantly less than she should have been. We have found the Council was at fault. We have made recommendations to improve its complaints procedure and to backpay Mrs X what she should have been paid, as a long-term foster carer. We have also asked the Council to contact others who might have been in a similar position to Mrs X.