Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to conclude its consideration of a complaint by a former foster carer. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains that the Council has declined to conclude its consideration of her complaint about its actions while she was 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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Following allegations against a third party in relation to children in her care, Miss X was deregistered as a foster carer and was the subject of an enquiry led by the Local Authority Designated Officer. Miss X says the Council’s actions have caused her harm and distress.
6. Miss X complained to the Council in July 2024. She was unhappy with the Council’s initial response and escalated her complaint to the second stage of the complaint procedure. She complains that the Council has declined to conclude the matter because of a concurrent Child Safeguarding Practice Review (CSPR). Miss X believes this is unreasonable and wants the Council to continue with the second stage of the complaint procedure.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant our intervention. The Council has not refused to deal with the matter. Rather, it has effectively paused its consideration until the CSPR is over. Miss X disagrees with this decision, but that does not mean it amounts to fault.
8. The Council has properly explained why it does not believe it is appropriate to pursue the complaint process concurrently with the CSPR and its position appears reasonable and proportionate. The decision delays conclusion of the matter but does not deny Miss X the opportunity to pursue her complaint. It is not for the Ombudsman to criticise the position the Council has set out, or intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman