Summary: The Council was not at fault for refusing to give Miss X a supported lodgings allowance from the date her nephew – a looked-after child – moved in with her. However, there was some later fault in how the Council decided when to start the allowance. It has agreed to reconsider its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Miss X, complains about how the Council dealt with the placement of her nephew – a looked-after child whom I refer to as Y – into her care.
2. Miss X says the Council failed to provide her with proper financial support and refused to assess her as a local authority foster carer. She says she is on a low income, and this had caused her a financial injustice. She wants financial support backdated to when Y moved into her care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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)
5. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information from Miss X and the Council.
7. I considered:
• Relevant parts of the Children Act 1989 (which I refer to as ‘the Act’).
• Relevant parts of The Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (England) Regulations 2010 (which I refer to as ‘the Regulations’.
• The Council’s procedure for placing children in unregulated settings.
8. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

9. The Act allows councils to place children in “other arrangements”, which are not either in a children’s home or with a foster carer. (Section 22C(6)(d))
10. The Regulations say councils must be satisfied that accommodation is suitable for a child before placing them in an unregulated setting. (Regulation 27)
11. The Council can only place children over the age of 16 in unregulated settings. These settings can include ‘supported lodgings’ – family or domestic settings in which the adults responsible for the care of the child are not approved as foster carers. (The Council’s procedure)

What happened

12. In November 2022, after an incident with his mother, Y (who, at the time, was 17) moved into Miss X’s flat.
13. The Council supported the move on a temporary basis, but not for anything longer-term – as Y was sleeping on Miss X’s sofa. It took steps to try and find him alternative accommodation.
14. The Council provided new bedding for Y. It agreed a £30 per week allowance for Miss X, £100 cash for Y’s Christmas present, a £50 supermarket voucher and a food parcel. Y was also receiving a £75 per week allowance.
15. In December, during a social work visit, Y told the Council that he was now sleeping in Miss X’s room, and she was sleeping on the sofa.
16. In January, when the Council had found a new placement for Y, Miss X said she would be able to care for him longer-term. She confirmed that he now had his own room, and she was sleeping on the sofa.
17. The Council bought some clothes for Y (£100) and a new sofa bed for Miss X (£300). Miss B said she also wanted to be assessed as a kinship carer for Y (which would have entitled her to an allowance).
18. The Council considered Miss X’s request. But it decided there was the potential that such an assessment could be unsuccessful, which would put Y’s placement at risk.
19. Instead, the Council conducted a ‘supported lodgings assessment’. It agreed to provide Miss X with a weekly allowance of £197.98.
20. The Council considered to which date it should backdate the allowance. Its internal emails said one of the considerations was when Miss X ‘gave up her bed’ for Y. It then decided to backdate the allowance to January.
21. After Miss X complained to the Council about this, it confirmed that “payments were back dated to … January, which is when the team were notified, and [Y] had his own space and bed”.

My findings

22. Under the Regulations and its own procedure, the Council had to be satisfied that Y’s accommodation in Miss X’s flat was suitable before agreeing to a supported lodgings placement.
23. The Council initially decided the accommodation was unsuitable because Y was sleeping on a sofa. Consequently, although it provided some money and resources to Miss X to support her while it found somewhere else for Y to live, it refused to pay her a supported lodgings allowance for the period in which Y did not have his own bed.
24. This was an approach the Council was entitled to take. And, as it considered the needs of Miss X and Y, provided some temporary financial support and made a decision on Miss X’s allowance which was not obviously unreasonable, I have found no fault with the Council on this point.
25. When Miss X asked for a kinship fostering assessment, the Council considered doing one but refused, noting the risk to placement should the assessment be negative. Instead, it decided to do a supported lodgings assessment.
26. As Y was 17, this was an option which was available to the Council. And, as it explained its reasons, and as these reasons were not obviously unreasonable, I have found no fault with its decision-making.
27. When the Council agreed Miss X’s supported lodgings allowance, it decided to backdate it to January. Its case records and complaint response say this was because that was when Y got his own room (and, before then, the placement was not suitable).
28. However, the Council’s records show that it found out Y had his own room in December – three weeks earlier.
29. This was not taken into account by the Council when deciding to backdate the allowance, and, given the importance of Y gaining his own room to the Council’s decision-making, I have found fault with the Council on this point.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. Within four weeks, the Council has agreed to reconsider its decision not to backdate Miss X’s supported lodgings allowance further than January 2023.
31. The Council has agreed to provide us with evidence it has done this.

Back to top

Final decision

32. The Council was not at fault for refusing to give Miss X a supported lodgings allowance from the date Y moved in with her. However, there was some later fault in how it decided when to start the allowance.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman