Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s claim for reimbursement for damage caused by a foster child. This is because he can make an insurance claim and if needed to a court.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council told him it would cover the cost of damage caused by a child he was fostering, but later said he should deal with this through an insurance claim.
2. Mr X says he is still living with immense damage to his home and is seeking reimbursement for all damage and loss caused during the placement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X provided foster care for a child for about a month in 2025.
8. Mr X told the Council the child was causing damage to property and had stolen from his home during the placement.
9. The Council agreed to find a new placement for the child. Mr X says the Council assured him it would reimburse any damage caused, and it was on this basis he agreed for the child to stay longer than the notice period required.
10. Mr X says the child caused further damage in the additional time.
11. When Mr X subsequently requested reimbursement from the Council, it declined and said he should make a claim through his insurance.
12. If we were to investigate this complaint, it is not likely we would find the Council at fault for saying this loss should be claimed through insurance.
13. If we found the Council gave assurances that it would reimburse the cost and then declined to do so without any good reason, we may find fault.
14. We could then consider any injustice caused to Mr X. This would not lead to a conclusion that the Council should reimburse the losses caused here.
15. As such, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking and there is an alternative route available to him which might.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is an alternative route he can use and it would be reasonable for him to use it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman