Summary: Miss X complained the Council has not completed the recommendations of the stage three independent investigation. She said this has impacted her mental and physical health. There was fault in the way the Council did not complete all recommendations from the stage three complaint response in a reasonable timescale. Miss X was frustrated and avoidably distressed by the Council’s actions. The Council should apologise, make a financial payment, complete all recommendations from the complaint response and issue guidance to staff.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council has not completed the recommendations of the stage three independent investigation. She said this has impacted her mental and physical health.

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)
4. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Miss X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
6. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
7. Miss X and the Council and the organisation 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

Background information

8. In February 2022 the Ombudsman issued practitioner guidance on the Children’s statutory complaints process.
9. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail.
10. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
11. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.
12. If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel. The council must hold the panel within 30 days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 days of the panel hearing.
13. If a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider the investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.

What happened

14. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.

Stage one

15. Miss X’s son, Y, has complex additional needs. Y became a looked after child in November 2021 because of the number of nights per month respite he received. Miss X complained to the Council about 12 points including a lack of support, failure to send meeting minutes to her, contents of documents she gets, referrals not actioned and a lack of feedback.
16. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint in December 2021. It upheld some of her complaint and partially upheld others. The Council did not uphold five points.

Stage two

17. Miss X requested the Council escalate her complaint to stage two in February 2022.
18. The Council appointed an investigating officer and independent person in April 2022.
19. The investigating officer completed their investigation and provided the final report at the end of June 2022. The independent person agreed with the report.
20. The Council accepted the investigating officers report and responded to Miss X’s stage two complaint in July 2022. It upheld some parts of the complaint and did not uphold other parts. The Council partially upheld two complaints and determined one part of the complaint response inconclusive. The Council agreed to keep Miss X updated about Y’s care and agreed to strengthen communication. The Council agreed to complete a communication plan.
21. The Council completed a communication plan at the start of September 2022. The plan set out how the Council will communicate with Miss X and the timelines for minutes after meetings.

Stage three

22. Miss X questioned the stage two investigation report. She requested the Council escalate her complaint to stage three at the end of September 2022. Miss X felt the Council should uphold all elements of her complaint.
23. The Council held the stage three panel review meeting in December 2022. During the meeting the Council accepted the stage two investigation should have gone into more detail. The meeting chair expressed their dissatisfaction with the investigation.
24. The stage three meeting chair provided their report a week after the panel review meeting. The report detailed the meeting did not uphold one element of the complaint. It could not come to a conclusion on another. The chair confirmed the meeting upheld all other elements of the complaint. The meeting chair provided six recommendations to the Council. The recommendations included an apology, a financial remedy, ensuring Miss X received copies of meetings minutes, a meeting to develop the working relationship with Miss X, a meeting to agree a communication plan and practice improvements.
25. The Council provided Miss X with its stage three decision in January 2023. The Council agreed with the stage three meeting chair’s report and agreed with their recommendations.
26. Miss X complained the Council has not completed the six recommendations the stage three decision letter said it would.
27. Miss X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Miss X would like the Council to apologise and follow procedures.
28. In response to my enquiries the Council acknowledged the delay appointing the investigating officer and independent person during stage two of the complaint process. The Council offered an additional £250 for this delay.

My findings

29. We do not re-investigate a complaint which has been through the statutory children's complaint procedure unless we consider the investigation was flawed.
30. The stage two investigating officer completed the investigation. The independent person oversaw the process. Miss X challenged the stage two investigation.
31. The stage three review considered the adequacy of the stage two investigation. The review found the investigating officer should have conducted the investigation in more detail. The review reached findings on all but one element of Miss X’s complaint. The review panel made six recommendations. The available evidence supported the decisions. The Council offered Miss X an additional £250 for the delay at stage two. This is in line with our guidance on remedies. I cannot add to this.
32. There was no fault in the way the Council investigated Miss X’s complaint. However, Miss X’s complaint is about the Council not completing the six recommendations. I have considered how the Council has acted relating to each recommendation.

Recommendation one

33. “The Panel recommends the Council offers in writing a full and unreserved apology to Miss X concerning all the complaint points that have been upheld or partially upheld.”
34. The stage three response letter offered Miss X its sincere apologies. The Council completed this recommendation.

Recommendation two

35. “The Panel recommends the Council gives further consideration to the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance, in light of the findings of this Panel meeting.”
36. The Council offered Miss X £200 for her distress. Miss X advised she did not accept this amount. The Council offered an extra £250 for the delay at stage two.
37. The Council considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies and made an offer to Miss X totalling £450. The Council completed this recommendation.

Recommendation three

38. “The head of service to ensure Miss X is provided with the notes and minutes from all Looked After Children Meetings that have occurred since her son became looked after as soon as possible. At the latest this should occur within two weeks of the Authority’s response to this letter. These should be sent both in paper format and be secure mail.”
39. Miss X reported she had to chase the Council for it to complete this recommendation. The Council said it applied a four-week extension to this recommendation. It has admitted it did not tell Miss X about this extension. This is fault and Miss X was frustrated and distressed by the lack of communication.
40. Miss X reported the Council did send her a document, but it was mixed up and illegible. The Council offered to deliver Miss X paper copies of these documents. I have seen no evidence the Council did this within the two weeks specified. The head of service noted in a meeting with Miss X in March 2023, they gave Miss X a paper copy of the notes. This meeting was 9 weeks after the Council issued its stage three response letter. The minutes of the meetings were not given to Miss X within the two weeks stated in the stage three response. This is fault and the delay frustrated Miss X.

Recommendation four

41. “The Panel recommends the head of service sets up a meeting as soon as is feasible with the Service Manager, the social worker and Miss X. The latest this should occur within four weeks of the Council’s response to the stage three letter. The purpose of this meeting is to listen to Miss X’s views as a parent regarding what has occurred and use this as a platform to establish a new improved relationship between Miss X and the Council.
42. The Council evidenced this meeting occurred in March 2023, nine weeks after the Council’s letter to Miss X. This is five weeks after the Council’s deadline. This is fault and the delay frustrated Miss X.
43. The meeting notes are brief and do not detail the discussions. A note stated: “other actions were agreed that are not relevant for recording as they are part of core business and rebuilding the relationship between Miss X and the Council.” I cannot say Miss X’s views were listened to as the meeting notes do not detail them. The Council has not fully completed this recommendation. This is fault and frustrated Miss X.

Recommendation five

44. “The Panel recommends the head of service ensures feedback is sought as soon as is feasible from Miss X regarding the communication plan. At the latest this feedback should be obtained within four weeks of the Council’s response to this letter. This plan should then be revised as necessary and implemented. The plan should be subject to regular review, at a frequency to be agreed with Miss X.”
45. The Council met with Miss X in March 2023, nine weeks after the letter. This is five weeks after the recommendation stated. This is fault and the delay frustrated Miss X.
46. The Council previously issued a communication plan in September 2022. Miss X said the plan detailed communication should be every five weeks, but this had not happened.
47. The Council issued a new communication plan in September 2023. This was nine months after the stage three letter. The new communication plan is more detailed and focussed on issues Miss X reported to the Council after it issued the previous plan. There is no detail how often the plan would be reviewed with Miss X.
48. The Council did not issue the revised plan until six months after meeting Miss X. This is fault and the delay frustrated Miss X.

Recommendation six

49. “The Panel recommends the head of service considers practice improvements in the light of the findings of this Stage 3 review meeting. These improvements should include:
• Ensuring a process is put in place so that notes from Child in Need Meetings are distributed within a stipulated timescale, that also specifies by whom and by what mechanism. This process should be capable of being audited.
• Ensuring a process is put in place so that minutes from Looked After Children Reviews are distributed within a stipulated timescale that also specifies by whom and by what mechanism. This process should be capable of being audited.
• Ensuring a process so that parents have sight of Child in Need Assessments within a stipulated timeframe, alongside an opportunity for parents to make clear within the Assessment any areas of disagreement. The process should include a mechanism to evidence the date when parents receive the completed Assessment.”
50. The Council provided a document to detail its professional standards. This document is dated November 2022. The Council issued its stage three complaint response in January 2023, with the above recommendations. The professional standards document does not evidence any practice improvements as set out in the recommendation.
51. The Council stated the head of service discussed this in a meeting with senior managers. There is no record of this meeting, therefore it is not auditable. As there is no record of the meeting, I cannot say the Council completed this recommendation. This is fault and frustrated Miss X.
52. The Council has not completed recommendations three, four, five or six within a reasonable timescale. This is fault and the delay frustrated Miss X.
53. The Council has now completed recommendations three, four and five. However, I am not satisfied the Council has completed recommendation six as there is no record of the Council considering any practice improvements.

Back to top

Agreed action

54. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Miss X by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for not completing all recommendations from the stage three complaint response in a reasonable timescale. This apology should be in accordance with the Ombudsman’s new guidance Making an effective apology.
• Pay Miss X £300 as an acknowledgement of the frustration and distress the identified fault caused. This is in addition to the £450 offered from the complaint process.
• Agree a suitable review period with Miss X for the communication plan and include this in the plan.
• Complete action six and fully document the decisions taken.
• Remind relevant staff of the importance of accurately recording meetings.
• Remind relevant staff of the importance of completing all action from complaints in a reasonable timescale.
55. The Council should provide evidence of the actions taken to satisfy the recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

56. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Miss X.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman