Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about children services’ actions between 2000 and 2016. There are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, complains about the Council’s children services actions from 2000 to 2016.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. I considered Miss X’s comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X says that the Council failed to properly protect her and support her as a child. She says it led to her being harmed. She says it failed to provide her with a pathway plan when she left foster care.
7. Miss X complained to the Council. The Council considered her complaint within its Children Act statutory complaints procedure.
8. The law sets out a three stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. At stage two of this procedure, the Council appoints an Investigating Officer and an Independent Person (who is responsible for overseeing the investigation). If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review. If a council has investigated something under this procedure, we would not normally re-investigate it unless he considers that investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.
9. The Council started the stage two in December 2020. The Investigating Officer tried multiple times to arrange to meet or speak to Miss X. Two appointments were cancelled. The Investigating Officer made it clear they could not progress the complaint without her cooperation. They suggested she decide if she wanted to go ahead. She said she did and said she was available. But then no meeting was able to be arranged at a time she could agree to.
10. The Council has to provide pathway plans to young people who are leaving full time care until they are 21, or 25 if they are in full time education. Miss X is now 26.

Analysis

11. We should not dis-apply the requirements of late complaints in historic cases unless we have very clear reasons for doing so satisfy the following two tests:
• We are confident there is a realistic prospect of reaching a sound, fair, and meaningful decision, and
• We are satisfied that the complainant could not reasonably be expected to have complained sooner.
12. I am not satisfied on either test.
1. Miss X says she has obtained her files and there are significant gaps. Given the time involved here, it may be difficult to find out the material facts with reasonable confidence. We are less likely to be able to gather sufficient evidence to reach a sound judgement.
2. It will be difficult to achieve a meaningful remedy, given the time that has already passed, the difficulty in proving causality over longer time periods, and changes in Miss X’s situation.
3. It is clear the Council gave Miss X significant opportunities to progress her complaint at stage two and she has not taken this up. She says the early 2021 Covid restrictions prevented it for a time. She has a school age child who may have been at home for part of that period. But the Investigating Officer has been willing to meet virtually. She says she has suffered from ill health since December 2020. But this does not account for the whole time. We expect complainants to not let the matter rest. But there is no evidence here that Miss X has actively pursued the stage two progress.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman