Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her deregistration as a foster carer. The Independent Review Mechanism panel is better placed than the Ombudsman to do so.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council discriminated against her when it deregistered her as a foster carer. She said the experience has been very stressful and has had a negative impact for her financially. She would like the Council to restore her foster carer registration and put in reasonable adjustments to allow her to continue to act as a foster carer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X was deregistered as a foster carer in 2024. She complained the Council did not make adequate reasonable adjustments for her learning difficulties when it appointed her as a foster carer, and during the process which led to her deregistration.
6. There is another body better placed to consider the substantive matter. Foster carers may ask the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) to review a decision to recommend deregistration. While the IRM cannot overturn a decision to deregister, neither can the Ombudsman. The IRM is the body set up to consider such matters and is better placed than the Ombudsman to do so. The Council explained in its stage two complaint response that Miss X had the option to escalate the matter to an independent panel.
7. In any event, we could not add to any previous investigation by the Council. It considered Miss X’s complaint and provided her with two complaint responses. An Independent Investigating Officer carried out the stage 2 complaint investigation and concluded that Miss X was not provided with adequate support during the deregistration process. The Council has apologised to Miss X for this. The stage 2 complaint response also identified other service improvement recommendations which the Council accepted.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the Independent Review Mechanism Panel is better placed than the Ombudsman to do so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman