Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to investigate Ms X’s complaint about the support she received as a Care Leaver at stage two of the statutory complaint procedure for complaints about children’s services. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Ms X, investigate the complaint, and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the support the Council provided her as a Care Leaver when she moved into her own accommodation.
2. She said the lack of support caused her avoidable distress and financial loss.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

5. I considered the complaint and the information Ms X provided.
6. I referred to the Ombudsman's Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
7. Ms X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
8. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Statutory children’s complaints

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. We also published practitioner guidance on the procedures, setting out our expectations.
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 investigating officer (IO) to look into the complaint and an independent person (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence.
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.

What happened

13. In January 2024, Ms X complained to the Council about the support from the Leaving Care team around her transition to living independently. The Council responded to the complaint at stage one of the statutory complaint process at the end of January.
14. Ms X asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two. In late February, the Council told Ms X it would not consider her complaint at stage two. Instead. the Council referred Ms X to complain to the Ombudsman.
15. In May, the Ombudsman invited the Council to remedy the complaint by conducting a stage two investigation. The Council refused on the basis that it had responded thoroughly at stage one.

My findings

16. Getting the best from complaints is statutory guidance. Councils must have regard to it and should only depart from it with good reason. The guidance says:

“once a complaint has entered Stage 1, the local authority is obliged to ensure that the complaint proceeds to Stages 2 and 3 of this procedure, if that is the complainants wish.” (Getting the best from complaints 3.15)

17. Ms X is entitled to have her complaint investigated at all stages of the statutory complaints process if she wishes. It is not for the Council to decide whether to escalate the complaint to stage two.
18. The Council’s failure to arrange a stage two investigation when Ms X asked for one was fault. The Council repeated this fault in response to the Ombudsman.
19. As a result, the Council has denied Ms X the independent investigation of her concerns she asked for. Ms X has had to go to avoidable time and trouble complaining to the Ombudsman, and experienced avoidable delay in progressing her complaint. This is a significant injustice to Ms X.
20. The statutory children’s complaints procedure was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with access to an independent, thorough and prompt response to their concerns. Because of this, we expect people to complete the complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns. I have therefore not investigated Ms X’s concerns about her support from the Leaving Care team.

Back to top

Agreed action

21. To remedy the injustice to Ms X from the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology
• Investigate Ms X’s complaint at stage two of the statutory complaints procedure
• Pay Ms X £500 in recognition of her significant and avoidable time and trouble and distress.
22. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
23. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Remind relevant staff that the Council must complete the children’s statutory complaints procedure once started.
24. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman