Summary: The Council wrongly refused to consider Mr D’s complaint through the children’s complaints procedure on the basis he made the complaint ‘late’. This has caused upset, time and trouble. The Council will now consider the complaint and apologise for failing to do so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr B, says the Council failed to provide support to three siblings when they turned 18. Mr B and his wife were carers for the siblings under a Special Guardianship Order. When the young adults turned 18 Mr B and his family have continued to support the care leavers in the absence of any support from the Council. The siblings believe they have missed out on support with job applications, budgeting, housing, and living costs. Mr B says the Council should consider the complaint even though the siblings turned 18 over 12 months ago because they originally pursued the complaint with another council, and it was only recently they became aware Slough had a responsibility for offering support. The siblings are all Looked After children with their own vulnerabilities. And it is possible to consider the complaint effectively and fairly, regardless of the time that has passed. This complaint is on behalf of Mr D, there are two other complaints for the other siblings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• Information provided by Mr B and the Council.
• ‘Getting the Best from Complaints. Social Care Complaints and Representations for Children, Young People and Others’. Guidance issued by the department for education and skills. Referred to in this statement as the guidance.
• The Children Act 1989.
5. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council took Mr D and his two siblings into care when they were young children. A few years later Mr and Mrs B became legal guardians under a Special Guardianship Order.
7. Section 24(2) of the Children Act 1989 means the Council had a duty to Mr D between the ages of 16 to 20 to provide advice and assistance, and up to age 25 in some circumstances. The Council says these circumstances do not apply, but it provided support up to age 20.
8. Mr D lives outside of the borough of Slough so initially thought the Local Authority where he lives was responsible for providing support when he was leaving care.
9. Aged 23, Mr D wrote to the Council to say he only found out a few months previous that Slough was responsible to support him rather than the Local Authority where he lived. Mr D said he recalls having a Personal Advisor from Slough, but that he never saw his pathway plan until recently, and he did not receive the support he needed.
10. The Council responded and said “Local Authorities and Trusts do not need to consider complaints made more than one year after the grounds to make the representation arose. This is in place to ensure that Local Authorities have a reasonable prospect of being able to investigate matters thoroughly and that the momentum for resolving the complaint is not lost. In this case you are asking for consideration to be given to things said that arose over one year ago. Furthermore, some of the information provided is about historic events.”
11. 3.3.1 of the guidance says “Local authorities do not need to consider complaints made more than one year after the grounds to make the representation arose (regulation 9). In these cases, the Complaints Manager should write to advise the complainant that their complaint cannot be considered and explaining the reasons why he has adopted this position. This response should also advise the complainant of their right to approach the Local Government Ombudsman. However, as with freezing decisions, decisions need to be made on a case by case basis and there should generally be a presumption in favour of accepting the complaint unless there is good reason against it.”
12. 3.3.2 of the guidance says “The time limit can be extended at the local authority’s discretion if it is still possible to consider the representations effectively and efficiently. Local authorities may also wish to consider such complaints if it would be unreasonable to expect the complainant to have made the complaint earlier. For example, where the child was not able to make the complaint or did not feel confident in bringing it forward in the year time limit.”
13. 3.3.3 of the guidance says “Though not exclusive, possible grounds for accepting a complaint made after one year are:

• genuine issues of vulnerability.
• the local authority believes that there is still benefit to the complainant in proceeding.
• there is likely to be sufficient access to information or individuals involved at the time, to enable an effective and fair investigation to be carried out; and
• action should be taken in light of human rights-based legislation.”

14. The Council is the corporate parent and has the role to carry out many responsibilities that a loving parent should. This includes encouraging organisations to do as much as they can towards improving the levels of care provided so the children can feel in control of their lives and are able to overcome the barriers they face. One thing the Council can do in this role is help children and young people gain access to services provided by the Council, and encouraging the young people to express their views, wishes and feeling.

Was there fault causing injustice?

15. I must now consider whether there was fault by the Council which caused Mr D an injustice.
16. The Council refused to consider Mr D’s complaint on the basis he made the complaint over a year after the grounds to make the complaint arose. I assume by this the Council means the grounds arose when Mr D was transitioning into adulthood several years earlier. There is no evidence of how the Council considered whether the grounds arose when Mr D became aware of the Council’s responsibilities in 2020, when he was previously under the impression it was his Local Authority and had complained there. Also, that Mr D said he only saw his pathway plan in 2020 and therefore any grounds to complain about that plan only arose once he had seen a copy of it.
17. I do not consider the Council has fully explained its reasons for refusing to consider the complaint so has not complied with 3.3.1 of the guidance. There is a presumption in favour of accepting a complaint, unless there is a good reason against it. I do not find the Council has given a good reason. The Council has shown in its response to the Ombudsman it is possible to consider the representations effectively and efficiently.
18. The Council also has duties as a corporate parent to help Mr D gain access to services and overcome barriers but has put a barrier in his way by refusing to consider his complaint. This has caused upset to Mr D and leaves him feeling further unsupported by the Council, and Mr B has had the time and trouble of pursuing a complaint to the Ombudsman on Mr D’s behalf.

Back to top

Agreed action

19. To put things right the Council will accept Mr D’s complaint and consider it though its statutory children’s complaints procedure. The Council will apologise to Mr B and Mr D for failing to accept the complaint following grounds arising in 2020 and for not giving a good reason for the rejection.
20. The Council should complete the recommended actions within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision and provide evidence of its compliance to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have completed my investigation on the basis the agreed action acknowledges the impact and puts things right.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman