Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s concern the Council initially refused to consider her complaint and then how it has dealt with reestablishing her contact with her former foster child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s initial decision not to investigate Mrs X’s complaint. We could add nothing more to the Council’s response to Mrs X’s other complaints to justify investigating further. It is also reasonable for Mrs X to continue pursuing the outcomes she seeks via the courts.

The complaint

1. Mrs X has made two complaints to us. The first is about the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint after it removed a foster child from her care in July 2025.
2. Mrs X second complaint is about the Council’s handling of contact between her and her former foster child. Mrs X says the court has ordered the foster child be returned to her care, but the Council is delaying this. Mrs X is unhappy her contact with the foster child has not been allowed for a year and the Council is hindering this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Mrs X’s first complaint

8. The foster child Mrs X was caring for was removed from her care in July 2025. The Council declined to consider Mrs X’s complaint about this at the time. It explained to Mrs X that it could not consider her complaint while there was an ongoing police investigation involving her husband.
9. The Council’s corporate complaint procedure and the statutory procedure for children social care complaints allows it to decline to consider a complaint in certain circumstances. An example of this would be when consideration of a complaint might prejudice or interfere with an ongoing police investigation.
10. We will not investigate because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its handling of Mrs X’s first complaint. It was entitled to reject her complaint while the police investigation was ongoing.

Mrs X’s second complaint

11. Mrs X made a further complaint to the Council in May 2026. She was unhappy about her lack of contact with her former foster child. She said the police investigation the previous year did not involve her and wanted to know why the Council had not done more to help her have contact with her former foster child.
12. The Council explained it was acting on the wishes of the foster child about the pace, frequency and type of contact they had with Mrs X. The Council apologised that some of its communication with Mrs X in the past year had not been better. In particular, it should have followed up and explained why it had ended an online contact session and updated its records, so Mrs X was not contacted when something happened involving the foster child. The Council also confirmed to Mrs X that the foster child would not returning to her care and it was inappropriate and distressing for her to say otherwise to the child.
13. Mrs X strongly disagrees with the Council’s action and its explanation of what happened during her contact with the foster child. However, there is nothing to suggest the Council is not acting in the best interest of the foster child that would justify us getting involved. In the absence of independent evidence which shows exactly what happened during the online contact session, we are unlikely to reach a different view of this matter.
14. The Council has already apologised to Mrs X and there appears nothing more we could meaningfully achieve by investigating further. Ultimately, the outcomes Mrs X appears to be seeking of reestablishing contact and eventual care of the foster child are matters for the courts rather than us. I understand Mrs X is already in the process of taking such action at court.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is nothing more we could achieve and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. It is also reasonable for Mrs X to continue pursuing the outcomes she seeks via the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman