Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to arrange suitable contact with her children or update her on their progress while they lived with foster carers. The Council was at fault for failing to send Ms X some of the records of her contact sessions with the children. The missed contact records caused Ms X undue distress. We recommend the Council apologise and send her the records. The Council was also at fault for failing to properly facilitate arrangements for a family holiday. It had already taken appropriate steps to remedy that fault. The Council was not at fault in the other matters Ms X complained about.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to arrange suitable contact with her children or update her on their progress while they were living with foster carers. Specifically, she said:
• she was unhappy that her contact with the children was supervised;
• the Council failed to provide her with monthly updates about the children;
• the Council did not send her copies of its contact supervision records; and
• the Council allowed the foster carers to book a holiday with the children on the same dates as her holiday with them.
2. Ms X says this caused her significant distress and anxiety and affected her relationship with her children.

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 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)
4. 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)
5. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5)).
7. Ms X has not complained to the Council that it failed to send her copies of its supervision contact records. I have exercised discretion to investigate this issue because it relates closely to Ms X’s complaint about her contact with the children.
8. 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)
9. Ms X complained about the Council's support leading up to when the children became looked after in 2019 as well as the entire period following this. I have seen no reason to exercise discretion to investigate all of that time. I have therefore investigated events from November 2020, when the Council offered Ms X monthly updates and around the time she began complaining about the supervised contact.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I have considered:
• all the information Ms X provided and discussed the complaint with her;
• the Council’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided; and
• the Council’s policies, relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
11. Ms X 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

Relevant law and guidance

12. Councils are responsible for the safeguarding and wellbeing of all looked after children in their care. There are a number of ways that children become ‘looked after’ by a council. One is when a court grants a care order. This is when the judge decides to place the child in the care of the council for their safety and wellbeing.
13. The law says councils must allow the child who is the subject of the care order reasonable contact with their parents. The council has a general duty to promote contact with wider family members such as grandparents or siblings. If a parent is unhappy with the level or quality of contact the council allows, they can try to resolve the situation by talking to the child’s social worker. If they cannot resolve the situation in this way, then they can apply to the court for an order for contact with a child in care.
14. The Council's policy says it should review contact arrangements at a child’s looked after child review and if there are any significant developments. It also says that if contact is supervised, the supervisor’s observations must be recorded and shared with the parents.
15. Looked after child reviews consider how well the council is fulfilling the child’s care plan, monitor the child’s progress and decide any necessary changes. In established placements, councils hold the reviews every six months.

What happened

16. In early 2019, Ms X’s two children became looked after and went into foster care. In August, the Court granted a care order for the children. The care order did not specify the manner of Ms X’s contact with the children.

Contact arrangements

17. In July 2020, Ms X became distressed at a contact session with the children and the Council decided to supervise future sessions so it could provide support. The Council began the supervised sessions the following month.
18. Ms X initially agreed the supervision was useful but from late 2020 onwards, she repeatedly questioned the contact arrangements with the Council. Her main concern was that contact continued to be supervised.
19. Records show the Council frequently considered whether it should make changes to the supervision arrangements. It consulted with the children, took account of Ms X’s views and what it felt would be in the children’s best interests. It did this formally at the children’s statutory reviews and regularly throughout the year including when Ms X raised concerns, at visits to the children and at the start and end of periods of lockdown, during which contact was virtual.
20. The Council did not make any changes to the arrangements and in September 2021, Ms X applied to the Court for a contact order to have unsupervised contact.

Updates and records

21. In November 2020, Ms X complained to the Council. She said she was unhappy with the Council's updates on the children.
22. The Council responded at the end of November to say:
• it would update Ms X every twelve weeks. In between those dates, Ms X could ask for an urgent call with 24 hours notice; and
• it would send contact supervision records every quarter.
23. Ms X remained unhappy and to resolve her concerns, the Council held the first of three mediation sessions in December 2020. At that meeting, it said the children’s social worker would call her every month for an update.
24. The Council held the second mediation session in January 2021 and the third in March 2021. At the third mediation meeting Ms X said the social worker had not made the monthly calls. Ms X also said she was not happy with the content of the updates; she felt they were about contact arrangements rather than the children’s progress. The Council agreed the social worker would call Ms X once a month even if they had nothing to update her on. However, it emphasised that if Ms X had anything particular she wanted to know she should raise it in the call. In June 2021, Ms X asked for email updates as she found the phone calls too distressing.
25. I have reviewed records of the Council's contact with Ms X. During the period I have investigated, the Council mostly contacted her in accordance with its schedule. However, it did not call Ms X in January 2021 or send an email in August 2021. Some of the contact was purely about contact arrangements but others included information about the children’s experiences at school, in the foster placement and general wellbeing. Ms X was also invited to meetings at the children’s school and to the looked after child reviews.
26. Prior to November 2020 the Council sent the contact supervision records within around two months of the meeting. It has not sent Ms X copies of two contact supervision records from November 2020. It sent the remaining records according to the quarterly schedule.

Holiday

27. In late April 2021, the Council told Ms X the foster carers had arranged a holiday with the children. Ms X was unhappy because the dates clashed with a holiday she had booked for them. She had originally booked the holiday for summer 2020 but moved it to the same dates in 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Throughout May, the Council explored options to allow the children to attend both holidays, including whether Ms X could move the dates of her trip. It also waited to see what impact COVID-19 travel restrictions would have on the plans.
28. In mid-May, Ms X complained. She said the Council had not prevented the children’s foster carers from booking a holiday which clashed with her holiday. She felt the Council had unfairly placed pressure on her to change her plans.
29. In early June, the foster carers confirmed they had cancelled their holiday due to COVID-19 travel restrictions, so the children were available to go away with Ms X.
30. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint in mid-June. It said:
• it had failed to check if Ms X’s 2021 dates were the same as those in 2020;
• it had taken too long to make a decision about the holidays;
• it had not communicated with Ms X effectively; and
• it had not intended to make Ms X feel like she was required to change the holiday dates. It was trying to ensure the children could attend both holidays if possible.
31. The Council said in future, Ms X should send confirmation of her holiday dates to the social worker, who would respond to confirm. It apologised for not making a decision sooner and that Ms X felt the Council put pressure on her to change her plans.

Findings

Contact arrangements

32. The Ombudsman cannot question a council's decision if it is made without fault. The children’s care order did not make explicit arrangements for contact with Ms X. As such, the Council had the discretion to direct the contact arrangements as it considered would be in the children’s best interests. When Ms X told the Council she was unhappy supervision was supervised, it considered the relevant information including the views of Ms X and the children. There was no fault in its decision-making process so I cannot question its decision not to change the arrangements.

Updates

33. Parents of looked after children frequently want regular updates on their children but there is no statutory or policy timescale for councils to do this. To alleviate Ms X’s anxiety, the Council agreed it would update her every twelve weeks, and later, every month. The Council gave Ms X updates in accordance with its schedule and the agreed method of contact every month in the period I investigated except for January and August 2021. I do not consider the missed months to be sufficient to make a finding of fault.
34. While Ms X may be unhappy with what was discussed in the updates, I do not find the Council at fault. I am satisfied the Council shared relevant information and Ms X had an opportunity to ask questions about the children’s progress. It is clear Ms X had significant anxiety about the contact arrangements and many of the updates were about that issue. Nonetheless, Ms X also attended the children’s looked after child reviews and school meetings which are the usual forums for parents to receive updates on their children and be a part of decision making.

Contact supervision records

35. The Ombudsman's “Principles of good administrative practice” states councils should ensure service users know what they can expect. They can do this by having appropriate guidance. The Council's policy states it will share contact supervision records with the parent but does not state a timescale for sharing the records. The lack of timescale does not constitute good administrative practice and was fault. However, this did not cause Ms X a significant personal injustice because prior to November 2020, the Council sent the records without undue delay.
36. In November 2020, the Council told Ms X it would send the records quarterly and complied with that schedule. However, the Council did not send Ms X two of the records. This was fault and caused Ms X avoidable distress.

Holiday

37. The Council accepted it failed to confirm Ms X’s dates when she postponed her holiday from 2020 to 2021 which meant it had not told the foster carers the children were already booked on a holiday. It also accepted it took too long to make a decision about the holidays and communicated poorly with Ms X. This was fault. The Council has remedied Ms X’s injustice by apologising and has taken suitable steps to prevent the fault happening again.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Ms X for the distress caused by its failure to send some of the contact records; and
• send her the contact supervision records from November 2020 and February 2021.
39. Within three months of the date of my final decision, the Council will amend its policy to include a timescale for sending supervision contact records to parents.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman