Kent County Council (25 012 261)
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in applying for a passport for a child she fosters. The Council have agreed to resolve the complaint by offering a suitable remedy.
The complaint
- Mrs X complains the Council delayed applying for a passport for Y, a child she fosters. She says the delay meant Y was unable to go on a trip which had been planned for over a year.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mrs X informed the Council she was planning a family holiday and asked the Council to obtain a passport for Y. The Council delayed in obtaining the required documents and submitting the passport application. The passport did not arrive in time for the trip and Y was unable to attend.
- The Council accept there were avoidable delays and have apologised. They say they have provided training to staff to prevent the issue reoccurring.
- We asked the Council to provide a symbolic remedy to Mrs X to recognise the lost opportunity and uncertainty caused by the delay. The Council has agreed and will complete this action withing four weeks.
Final decision
- We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint. The Council have agreed to resolve the complaint by offering a suitable remedy.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman