Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about children services reply to his complaint. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have requested a stage three review panel hearing on time. And it is unlikely we would criticise its decision to refuse a late request.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council’s children services team failed to reply properly to his complaint.

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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• it would have been reasonable for the person to have asked for a council review or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In June 2023 Mr X complained to the Council about its children services’ actions. It replied within its Children Act statutory complaints’ procedure. Mr X was not satisfied with that response and requested a stage two investigation.
6. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’, explains councils’ responsibilities and the Regulations in more detail.
7. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
8. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigating officer (IO) to look into the complaint and an independent person (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence.
9. Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The officer considers the IO report and any report from the IP. They decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take. The adjudicating officer should then write to the complainant with a copy of the investigation report, any report from the independent person and the adjudication response.
10. If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel. The council must hold the panel within 30 working days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 working days of the panel hearing.
11. The Council sent Mr X a stage two adjudication letter in January 2024. It said clearly that he could request a stage three hearing if he remained unhappy. It said he had to request this within 20 working days. During that month the Council confirmed the Independent Review Mechanism which looks at decisions to de register foster carers, could not look at the issues he felt the stage two had not covered.
12. Mr X says he missed the stage two adjudication letter. It was attached to an email. He did not read it but accepts he received it. In May he told the Council he was unhappy with the stage two. In early June the Council told Mr X he was too late to request a stage three and it considered his case closed.
13. It is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision to refuse to hold a stage three review panel. The regulations state:

A “request……must be made within 20 working days of the date on which the complainant received the notice of the local authority’s response and must set out the reasons for the complainant’s dissatisfaction with the outcome of the investigations.”

14. Mr X says he was in turmoil when he received the stage two. Families using the statutory complaints’ procedure often are and this is not an exceptional reason for not reading the letter. Mr X says the stage two failed to properly cover his complaint and he wants an investigation into the issues he feels it did not cover. This is something the stage three could have considered.
15. The statutory children’s complaints procedure was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with access to an independent, thorough and prompt response to their concerns. Because of this, we expect people to complete the complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns. We are not a replacement for the stage three process.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would criticise the Council’s decision to refuse to hold a children act statutory complaints procedure stage three review panel hearing. And it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have requested a stage three review panel within the required timeframe.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman