Summary: We will not investigate the complaint about the Council’s failure to provide support promised when the complainant obtained a Special Guardianship Order for her grandchildren. This is because there is no evidence of fault, and we cannot achieve the outcome she wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mrs C, complains that the Council failed to provide the support promised when she obtained a Special Guardianship Order for her grandchildren.

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 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 may decide not to continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the Mrs C and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. The complainant now has an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In late 2019, Mrs C was awarded a SGO for her four grandchildren. A support plan was agreed in court, which said the Council would provide Mrs C with a car and fund an extension to Mrs C’s property.
7. The Council’s policy on support for people caring for children under an SGO says it will review the financial support it offers annually or if there is a change of circumstances. The policy also says it may offer financial support to buy a car, which will be paid upon receipt of an invoice.
8. Mrs C identified a car she wanted to purchase, and the Council asked her to provide it with a copy of an invoice. A planning application was also submitted for the extension to Mrs C’s property.
9. Before the planning application was approved and before Mrs C provided a copy of an invoice for the car, two of Mrs C’s grandchildren left her care. Shortly after the planning application was approved, another of Mrs C’s grandchildren left her care. The Council made the decision not to proceed with the extension. It therefore reviewed the support plan, which was later agreed in court. The care plan did not include provision of a vehicle or extension to Mrs C’s property.
10. I will not investigate Mrs C’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council applied its policy correctly by asking Mrs C to provide a copy of an invoice before it would release payment for a new vehicle. It also applied its policy correctly when it reviewed the support plan in place, when there was a change of circumstances due to three of the four children left Mrs C’s care.
11. Mrs C wants the Council to pay for the extension and vehicle. But this is not an outcome we can achieve. This is because the new support plan, agreed in court, does not now contain these provisions. There is therefore no obligation on the Council to provide them.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs C seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman