Looked after children


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Oxfordshire County Council (24 005 262)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 06-Jun-2025

    Summary: Ms X complained on behalf of Miss Y about the way the Council dealt with her care and that of her child. The Council was at fault for delaying in completing some of the recommendations from the Children Act complaints procedure. This caused Miss Y frustration and uncertainty. The Council should apologise, make a payment and send us an action plan detailing how it will complete the recommendations.

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (24 002 642)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 02-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council did not send an apology as agreed. The Council has said it will send the apology. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (24 021 907)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 01-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council declining to escalate Miss X’s complaint about its actions relating to her child in its care. Investigation would be unlikely to achieve any more than the Council’s own investigation has already provided.

  • London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (24 023 084)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 01-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s historic complaint about the Council’s decision to allow her mother to have contact with her when she was a child in its care. This is because we could not carry out a full, fair and effective investigation of the matter now due to the very significant passage of time since the events complained about.

  • Lincolnshire County Council (24 020 392)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 27-May-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this historical complaint about the Council placing Mr Y in a children’s home in the 1970s. We could not carry out a sound, fair and meaningful investigation given the time that has passed.

  • Torbay Council (24 022 422)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 27-May-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in applying to discharge a care order for her children. We could not add to the Council’s investigation and responses under all three stages of the statutory complaints process.

  • Portsmouth City Council (24 022 059)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 21-May-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the support provided to Mrs X and her husband in caring for a grandchild. The final arrangements were or could have been decided in court and a legal bar prevents us investigating the matters complained of. The complaint is also late, and there would be no good reason to exercise discretion to consider it now even if there were no legal bar created by the court action.

  • London Borough of Southwark (24 021 375)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 09-May-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to regard the complainant as a kinship carer and her granddaughter as a looked-after child. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.

  • Cambridgeshire County Council (24 022 570)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 08-May-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s this complaint about the Council’s assessment of his child’s foster carer. The law prevents us from investigating anything that is the subject of court proceedings. We also cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

  • London Borough of Havering (24 008 441)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 30-Apr-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council manged her savings as a looked after child. There was fault in how the Council delayed transferring Miss X’s savings to her Child Trust Fund account and how it failed to provide Miss X with clear information about her savings. This caused Miss X avoidable distress for which the Council agreed to apologise and pay her a financial remedy. It also agreed to review its policy and practices around savings for looked after children.

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