Summary: Mr K complains the Council failed to deliver suitable beds for the children he was caring for and then failed to replace them. The Ombudsman has identified Council fault and the Council has agreed to make a payment and apologise for time and trouble.

The complaint

1. Mr K and his partner were caring for two children under a Special Guardianship Order. When the children moved in, Mr K asked the Council to provide single beds for them. The beds were accepted by the Council as being ‘unsuitable’. Mr K spent £525 on replacing them and wanted the Council to reimburse the money. The Council failed to do so, and Mr K complained about this to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Mr K provided with his complaint and spoke to him on the telephone. I sent Mr K and the Council a copy of my draft decision and have taken comments they made into account before reaching this final decision.
6. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

What happened

7. The Council delivered two single beds for the children being looked after by Mr K and his partner. These were divan beds with no drawers or storage in their bases although the rooms they were going into were small.
8. The Council says these beds were new and in plastic wrapping. Mr K says the beds were wrapped in plastic, but both the mattresses and divan bases were stained; perhaps also with fleas. He told me he thought they were ‘recycled’. The beds were too big for the bedrooms they were going into. They were in the house overnight and then stored (still in their wrapping) in the carport of Mr K’s house.
9. The social worker came to see the beds and agreed they were unsuitable because of their size. Neither party took photographs.
10. The Council said it could not return the beds because of the time that had elapsed since their delivery to Mr K. Mr K bought replacement beds for the children.
11. The Council says it advised Mr K to sell the beds in order to recoup some or all of the costs of the replacement beds. Mr K said that he could not afford the new beds but the state of the beds the Council delivered was so poor he, instead, donated them to a local charity shop.

What should have happened

12. Mr K would have been able to refuse delivery if the beds were unsuitable (for example, either clearly stained or too big for the rooms) but he did not.
13. However, once the social worker agreed the beds were unsuitable, the Council should have arranged for them to be picked up and replaced. There is evidence of discussion within the Council as to what should be done until, eventually, it was not possible to return the beds because of the time that had elapsed.
14. At the same time, the children needed beds. It is not unreasonable that because there was no clear instruction about what could be done, that Mr K purchased beds that did fit in the rooms and could have things stored underneath them. He could have used the mattresses that came with the beds (and the Council could have suggested that). There is no evidence the Council suggested this, and Mr K did not use the mattresses that had been delivered, which adds weight to his contention the mattresses were not suitable, possibly for hygiene reasons.
15. Similarly, because Mr K is clear they could not afford the expenditure on the beds, on the balance of probabilities, he would have sold the bases (even without the mattresses) if he felt he could have done so.

Fault

16. The Council should have been clear with its supplier as to what kind of beds were necessary. It knew the size of the rooms beforehand. If it had done this, the complaint may not have arisen. Its failure to do this is fault and it has caused inconvenience to Mr K.
17. Once the Council knew the beds were unsuitable – for whatever reason – it should have arranged for their return or removal. Its failure to do this is fault, which caused inconvenience to Mr K. The Council should consider whether it has procedures in place to allow social workers to make such decisions.
18. The Council’s delay providing the children with suitable beds is fault. It had accepted a duty but then failed to carry out that duty. Mr K had to provide the children with beds. This fault caused time and trouble, and distress, for Mr K and his family.
19. Because the Council failed to ensure the original beds were fit for purpose and then failed to return them when it had an opportunity to do so, I consider its failure to reimburse Mr K for beds he replaced them with was also fault.
20. However, I do not accept that replacement beds needed to have cost £525. I found reasonable quality bed frames and mattresses at an online store for £400 for two.

Agreed action

21. The Council has agreed to the following recommendations to remedy the injustice identified in this decision statement:
1. For the Council to apologise for the fault I have identified here, which caused Mr K and his family time and trouble. I consider a payment of £100 is also warranted for the distress caused to the family; particularly the children who needed beds.
2. The Council should reimburse Mr K £400 for the beds he provided for the children.
3. The Council should consider whether its procedures allow social workers to see that goods delivered to families can be returned promptly if they are unsatisfactory. It should tell me what action it will take so what happened in this case can be avoided in the future.
22. The above should be completed within four weeks from the date of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

23. There was fault by the Council when it failed to provide suitable beds for children being looked after by the complainant. I have recommended a remedy to the injustice caused by this fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman