Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a failure by the Council to pay an amount in compensation which had been recommended during an independent complaint process. This is because the Council has since decided to pay the complainant what has been recommended. Further investigation is therefore not necessary as it would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mrs Q) complains the Council has failed to honour a recommendation that it pay her £500 in respect of delays in its handlining of complaint considered under the statutory children’s complaint procedure.
2. In summary, Mrs Q says she and her family suffered significant hardship and distress due to the problems with the Council and feels anything short of the recommended amount fails to acknowledge the impact caused. As a desired outcome, she wants the Council to pay the recommended amount.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. On receipt of information I provided the Council about this complaint, it decided that it would now be accepting a report’s recommendation to pay Mrs Q £500 to acknowledge the problems she experienced. This was the outcome sought by Mrs Q when bringing this complaint to us. Further investigation is therefore not necessary and would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restriction I outline at paragraph three (above) applies.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman