Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained the Council failed to respond to their contacts about caring for young family members when they were taken into care. They also complained about contact arrangements. We found there was some fault in communication and responsiveness. This caused upset and frustration. However, it did not lead to the children being placed with foster carers when this would not have otherwise been the case.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that:
1. The Council failed to respond when she and her husband offered to provide care for his cousins in February 2023. She complains this caused distress and led to his cousins being placed with foster carers unnecessarily.
2. Officers misled them about an assessment to consider their viability as carers for Mr X’s cousins which was ordered by the court.
3. That social workers were slow to make introductions to the cousins’ foster carers which delayed contact with them. Social workers also allowed themselves to be manipulated into cancelling planned contact visits by other family members. Mrs X complains there was poor communication and confusion about contact because social workers did not follow the correct procedures around contact with the cousins, some of which was later challenged by the Council’s solicitor. The Council later made a decision to allow contact with other people which appeared to contradict what she had been told.
4. That the Council did not file their appeal against a care order with the court.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, 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

What I have and have not investigated

6. We are investigating complaints 1 and 3. We are not investigating complaints 2 or 4. This is because they are matters related to court proceedings. We sought information about the extent to which contact was ordered by the courts. As the contact arrangements subject to this complaint were not court ordered, we were able to investigate complaint 3.
7. Our investigation concerns events up until January 2024 when the Council responded to Mr and Mrs X’s complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered the information provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council. I took account of the relevant law and our jurisdiction to investigate.
9. Mr and Mrs 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

Section 20 Children Act 1989

10. Section 20 of the Children Act 1989 says councils shall provide accommodation to any child in need within their area who needs it, because:
• there is nobody with parental responsibility to care for them;
• they have been lost or abandoned; or
• the person who has been caring for them has been prevented from providing suitable accommodation or care.
11. In 2017 the Court of Appeal ruled that there is no express statutory requirement for a council to obtain consent from parents before applying Section 20. Rather, the law states that a Council cannot accommodate a child under section 20 if a person holding parental responsibility objects and is willing and able to care for the child or arrange care for the child. While a child is accommodated under Section 20, the parents retain full parental responsibility.

What Happened

Complaint 1

12. The information in this statement provides an overview of the key events most relevant to the complaint. It is not intended to set out everything that happened.
13. Mr and Mrs X says they became aware in early 2023 that Mr X’s cousins were in temporary local authority care. The children were accommodated by the Council under Section 20 of the Children Act.
14. Mrs X told us she contacted the Council on multiple occasions throughout February and although she was told that someone would contact her on several occasions, this did not happen. Mrs X complained that she did not get a response to multiple calls and emails.
15. The Council stated it only had a record of one contact from Mrs X on 18 February in which she offered to care for the children. The Council sent an assessment form to Mrs X in late February which she returned straight away. A social worker visited to assess their home in March but they heard nothing further.
16. Mrs X provided evidence she chased for a progress update on 6 March and again on 3 May.
17. In response to Mrs X’s later complaint, the Council accepted that communication had fallen below the standard expected and this would be raised with the relevant social worker. It stated all requests for information had to be referred to the children’s parents as, at that time, the children were being accommodated under Section 20 of the Children Act. It stated, on occasion, this led to delays in being able to respond promptly. The Council’s response to the complaint only provided a basic acknowledgement of what happened.
18. We asked the Council to provide a more detailed account of the communication from Mr and Mrs X from February 2023. It only provided a further copy of its complaint response. The Council stated the children’s mother had refused consent for the Council to discuss the children’s circumstances with members of the wider family. She retained parental responsibility and the children were being accommodated voluntarily under Section 20 so the Council could not override this.
19. From May 2023 the children were subject to interim care orders. In July 2023 the Council contacted Mr and Mrs X following a court direction to assess family members as potential carers for them. The courts later issued a full care order, placing the children with their foster carers. We cannot consider any aspect of the court process.
20. Mr and Mrs X complain that, had the Council followed the correct process from the outset and engaged with them about providing a placement for the children, the outcome would have been different, and the children could have been placed with them. They sought a review of the court agreed arrangements for their care as a result.

Complaint 3

21. Mr and Mrs X told us there was a delay in the social worker providing the contact details of the children’s foster care so that contacts could be arranged during September. They say they contacted social workers on numerous occasions to follow up on this, almost daily, without any success. They say their contacts were not responded to.
22. At a meeting on 4 October the Council encouraged contact with the children. However, there was further delay providing contact details and a lack of response from the Council to their contacts. Their contact details were not passed onto the foster carers as promised.
23. The Council told us it had no case records showing contacts from Mr and Mrs X from October 2023. It stated the social worker concerned was no longer at the council so it was unable to seek information from her as a result.
24. It is noted that contact started between Mr and Mrs X and the children in November. The Council considered this was appropriate to the children’s needs. The Council acknowledged that Mr and Mrs X had a good relationship with the foster carers and that much of the contact was arranged directly between Mr and Mrs X and the foster carers as a result.
25. Mr and Mrs X complain that there was an issue with the children’s planned visit to stay with them. They sought to rearrange this but the Council did not provide any help. Mrs X stated the arrangements were blocked by the parents who expressed invalid concerns. She referred to a second visit where there was a disagreement between the children’s parents over the planned visit. Mrs X complained that the social worker and foster carers were being manipulated by the children’s parents.
26. In early December, when Mrs X raised a complaint about the issues around contact, a social worker stated, because the children were subject to a court order they should not be introduced to other family members and it needed to be managed carefully. This was why discussions had taken place about who would be meeting them. However, Mrs X complained that in contrast to what they had been told, they became aware that the children had met other family members.
27. Mrs X stated, having agreed that she could contact the foster carers and make arrangements for contact directly, she was told in December by a council solicitor that they should not be having impromptu visits with the children. The Council had no record of this advice being given.
28. The Council noted there were disagreement between family members about information being shared with Mr and Mrs X and about them potentially being carers for them. The Council noted that Mr and Mrs X were found to be suitable potential carers, so it considered contact with them should take place.
29. The Council provided a note from its records from late 2023 in which contact arrangements were discussed and agreed with the children’s foster carers. These arrangements included contact with Mr and Mrs X amongst other people. The Council provided a schedule of contacts between Mr and Mrs X and the children from October 2023 onwards. It indicates face to face and video call contacts took place.

Were the Council at fault

30. The Council accepted that communication with Mr and Mrs X fell below the standard it would expect. I found that the failure to respond appropriately to contacts from Mr and Mrs X about the children, and their wish to become carers, was fault.
31. I acknowledge that this was upsetting and frustrating for Mr and Mrs X. However, I do not consider that any initial issues with communication led to the children being placed in foster care, rather than Mr and Mrs X’s care. I say this because, regardless of any failure to respond and communicate at the outset, the decision as to the most suitable placement for the children was a decision for the courts. When this decision was ultimately made, the courts had expressly invited the council to seek out family members who may wish to care for them, and as a result of this, the court was aware of Mr and Mrs X’s interest in doing so. This was considered as part of the court’s decision.
32. We have not been able to obtain detailed records of contact between Mr and Mrs X and the Council about contact, in and around October 2023. However, on balance I found it was more likely than not, that some of the contacts from them were not responded to promptly. This too was fault.
33. It is not clear what the context of the discussion between Mr and Mrs X and a council solicitor was in December 2023, so I have no evidence upon which to reach a view that this was fault.
34. Overall, I did not find that the Council’s approach to arranging contact with the children was incorrect, that social workers were manipulated or that their decisions disadvantaged Mr and Mrs X. During the period that the events of the complaint occurred, the children were accommodated by the Council under Section 20 of the Children Act. The law is clear that this means the children are voluntarily accommodated, and their parents retain parental responsibility. So, it was appropriate that the Council took account of parents’ views. Social workers have to exercise their own professional judgement when deciding what is appropriate for children in the Council’s care. The Council took decisions because of what it considered appropriate for the children’s wellbeing. I am also mindful that the Council has acknowledged that contact with Mr and Mrs X is appropriate, and contact has taken place.

Back to top

Action

35. Within four weeks of my final decision:
36. The Council should apologise to Mr and Mrs X for the issues with communication and responsiveness in February and October 2023. The apology should adhere to our guidance on making effective apologies. This can be found on our website, within our Guidance on Remedy here.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. There was fault by the Council for which an apology is appropriate.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman