Looked after children


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Slough Borough Council (17 011 103)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 15-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about whether the Council adhered to Mrs J's grandchildren's care plans, because the court has already considered the matter.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (17 011 056)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 06-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the involvement of the Council's social services with the complainant's family. This is because she has no consent to share data about one of her sons, and we cannot achieve the outcomes that she wants.

  • London Borough of Newham (17 003 443)

    Statement Not upheld Looked after children 26-Oct-2017

    Summary: Mr X says the Council did not compensate him adequately for failings in its care when he was a looked after child. The Ombudsman discontinued investigation of this complaint as no worthwhile outcome can be achieved through further pursuit of the matter by this service.

  • Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (16 014 218)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 09-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault in cancelling contact sessions for Mr X with his children without re-arranging them. It has offered Mr X an apology and a payment to recognise the distress caused and the unnecessary expenses he incurred. This is a satisfactory remedy.

  • Cumbria County Council (17 004 743)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 04-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to respond to Mr B's complaint. It has now agreed to respond to the complaint under stage 1 of the Children Act complaints procedure, so Mr B's injustice has been remedied.

  • Cheshire East Council (17 007 816)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Looked after children 28-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Miss D's complaint about the accuracy of information presented to court as complaints about what happened in court are outside his jurisdiction. We will not investigate Miss D's other complaints as it is unlikely we would find fault and there is not enough evidence of significant injustice to justify an investigation.

  • London Borough of Lewisham (16 013 768)

    Statement Not upheld Looked after children 20-Sep-2017

    Summary: I have not found fault in how quickly the Council responded to Ms B's emails or how it provided her with updates on her daughter's care. I have not commented on other matters because they are currently subject to an independent investigation under stage 2 of the Children Act 1989 complaints procedure.

  • Lancashire County Council (16 014 621)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 19-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Council was not at fault for how it dealt with a disclosure raised by Mrs X's son or for rearranging two contact sessions in May and June 2017. It was at fault in how it dealt with Mrs X's complaint and in its communications around what will happen when Mrs X's sons reach the age of 18. These faults led to confusion and frustration for Mrs X and the Council has agreed to apologise and explain what will happen when her sons reach the age of 18.

  • London Borough of Camden (17 002 389)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 07-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Council failed to complete a stage two independent investigation into Mr B's complaint under the children's statutory complaints procedure. It has now agreed to complete the stage two investigation without further delay.

  • West Sussex County Council (17 007 378)

    Statement Upheld Looked after children 07-Sep-2017

    Summary: The Council has agreed to consider this complaint under the statutory procedure for children's complaints. So the Ombudsman should not investigate the complaint yet.

;