Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council calculated Mr X’s Special Guardianship Allowance. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault. We also will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about historical payments of fostering allowance as it is late.

The complaint

1. Mr X first complained to us about the Council’s delay in responding to his complaint about Special Guardianship and fostering allowances. Since sending his complaint to us, the Council has responded meaning the delay is no longer an issue and we can now look at Mr X’s substantive complaint.
2. Mr X’s complains the Council are incorrectly assessing his special guardianship allowance and historical back payment of fostering allowance. Mr X says this has caused him substantial distress. He wants the Council to review his case, pay him the amount he says he is entitled to as well as financial compensation for the effect this has had on him and his family.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
4. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. In 2017, the government issued statutory guidance to councils on how to support Special Guardians and the children they look after.
9. The guidance states that, when deciding Special Guardianship Allowance (SGA), a council should have regard to the amount of fostering allowance it would have paid if the child were fostered instead.
10. The guidance also provides for SGA to be means tested. Councils must therefore consider other benefits the special guardian receives. SGA must not duplicate financial support available through the state benefits system. SGA from the Council is discretionary. Mr X is a Special Guardian and receives SGA payments from the Council.
11. The Council carried out a benefit check and informed Mr X he was eligible for a monthly payment in universal credit. The Council stated, as this government money was available to Mr X, the amount would be deducted from his SGA to prevent double payment.
12. Mr X says this is unfair as his family receives irregular monthly employment income meaning the amount of universal credit he can obtain each month will change through the year. Mr X says this will cause financial uncertainly and additional administration for his family which does not reflect the purpose of the guidance to ensure the financial stability of special guardians.
13. In accordance with the guidance, the Council can consider the complainant's income, benefits, expenses and financial commitments when assessing entitlement to an allowance. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of the assessment where it appears to have been carried out in accordance with the regulations and there is no evidence of procedural fault. The Council appears to have followed the guidance and provided a detailed and thorough response to Mr X’s complaint. We will not investigate this element of Mr X’s complaint further as we are unlikely to find enough evidence of fault by the Council.
14. Furthermore, the Council has not confirmed the outcome of its financial assessment of Mr X. It has informed Mr X that when it does, it will give Mr X the opportunity to comment on the assessment before it is finalised. Currently the Council’s payments of SGA to Mr X have not been reduced and remain the same. The injustice caused by the Council to Mr X at this time is therefore limited.
15. Mr X also complains the Council failed to pay him the correct amount of fostering allowance between 2018 and 2021. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint as it is late. Mr X was aware of the issue more than 12 months before bringing his complaint to the Council. I see no good reason he could not have raised his complaint with the Council, and then with the Ombudsman, sooner therefore I will not exercise discretion to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about SGA payments because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation by us. We also will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about backdated fostering allowance as it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman