Southend-on-Sea City Council (24 019 184)

Category : Children's care services > Friends and family carers

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 17 Aug 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not pay him the correct amount for caring for a child in his care and did not consult him before presenting a support plan to the Court. I have ended the investigation. This is because Mr X is satisfied with the outcome of the first part of his complaint. The second part of his complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because we cannot investigate complaints about what happened in court.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained the Council has not paid him and his wife the correct amount as special guardians for a child, Y, in their care. This has caused them financial distress. Mr X later complained the Council did not consult him and Mrs X before filing support plans at Court. This means they have not got the right support for Y. Mr X would like the Council to pay him and Mrs X the correct amount for caring for Y and amend the support plan.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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:
  • we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
  • further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or
  • there is another body better placed to consider this complaint; or

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

  1. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
  2. 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)
  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. We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been mentioned as part of the legal proceedings regarding a closely related matter. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
  2. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.
  2. Y was born in March 2024. The Council placed Y in foster care.
  3. Mr and Mrs X put themselves forward as special guardians for Y.
  4. The Council placed Y with Mr and Mrs X in May.
  5. The Council drafted a special guardianship support plan in July.

The original complaint

  1. Mr X complained to the Council. He said he and his wife were not receiving the full allowance for caring for Y. He said he had discussed the amount with social workers before taking Y into their care.
  2. The Council issued a stage one response in August and a stage two response in October. The Council did not uphold the complaint. It said as Mr and Mrs X were connected carers and not approved foster carers; they were not entitled to the full amount of foster carers allowance. Once the Council approved them as foster carers, they would receive the full amount. The Council apologised and said the social workers should have explained this.
  3. Later in October, Mr X asked the Council for a meeting about his complaint.
  4. In late November, the Court appointed Mr and Mrs X as special guardians for Y.
  5. The Council met with Mr and Mrs X in early December to discuss their complaint and followed this up in writing in the middle of December. The Council offered Mr and Mrs X the full amount of foster carer allowance and back paid this to when they started caring for Y. It said the social workers had not explained the payment policy clearly to Mr and Mrs X at the beginning of the proceedings. The Council said it had changed its process to ensure this does not happen again.
  6. The same day, Mr X emailed the Council and said ‘We are truly grateful for your review and its outcome, we are beyond happy to feel listened to.’
  7. In conversation with me, Mr X said he was satisfied with this result, which settled this part of his complaint.

Additional element to the complaint

  1. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman at the beginning of February 2025. He said the Council had misled him about the finances, as discussed above. He also complained the Council filed support plans with Court that he and Mrs X had not agreed. In conversation with Mr X, he told me he and his wife did not agree the support plan as it removed the financial payments for caring for Y which the Council had promised. They were also not happy with other parts of the support offered and had concerns about Y’s medical condition. They refused to sign the plan. Mr X said the parties discussed this at Court and the Judge ordered the parties to agree a new version within 14 days.
  2. A few days later, the Council wrote to Mr X. It referred to its previous letter in which it apologised for the miscommunication and offered to pay the higher fees including backpay. It said this part of Mr X’s complaint was concluded.
  3. The Councils letter also discussed the second part of Mr X’s complaint. It said the social worker visited Mr and Mrs X to discuss the amended plan as directed by the Court. The letter said Mr and Mrs X did not wish to sign the plan. It also said the Council’s legal team filed the amended plan at Court, in accordance with the Court direction. It said the legal team should have also served a copy on Mr and Mrs X. The Council said this was an oversight and apologised. It also said, ‘Given the concerns that you still have with the contents of the legal documents that have been filed with the court, I suggest that you contact your legal advisor asking them to write to the local authority’s legal team, clearly outlining the outstanding issues, with the hope that a resolution can be reached.’
  4. Mr X said the Council did not amend the plan and then filed the “new” version at Court. He said the Council had electronically signed the plan on behalf of Mr and Mrs X, without their permission. Mr X said this is contempt of Court.
  5. The Council said the “new” version of the plan that it filed at Court was not signed by Mr and Mrs X, their signatures were missing from the document.

Analysis

  1. Mr X told me he is satisfied with the Council’s response to his original complaint about finances. He referred to the meeting and later letter from the Council offering to pay the full amount of foster care allowance and back payment to when he and his wife started caring for Y. This was the result he wanted. The Council has already remedied the financial injustice by paying Mr and Mrs X the full amount as a foster carer. We cannot achieve anything more for Mr and Mrs X. There is no need to investigate this further.
  2. The second part of Mr X’s complaint is not something the Ombudsman can investigate. This is because the matter is subject to civil proceedings in a court of law. The preparation, collation, and analysis of evidence, including reports written by social workers for court proceedings and evidence given by council officers in any proceedings, is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Back to top

Decision

  1. I have ended my investigation. Mr X is satisfied with the Councils response to his initial complaint; I do not need to take further action. The second part of his complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and not something I can investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings