Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it responded to Miss X’s concerns about her children’s foster carer’s actions. It investigated the concerns and took appropriate action based on the information available at the time.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to take prompt action over her concerns about her children, Y and Z’s, foster carer. She says this caused her children unnecessary harm and severely impacted her mental health. She wants the Council to apologise and take appropriate action against the foster carer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Miss X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Law

Allegations against foster carers

6. The National Fostering Minimum Standards says investigations into allegations against carers should be carried out quickly and should provide protection to the child but also support to the person subject to the investigation. Foster carers should be told in writing about any allegations against them and given information about the timescale for completing the investigation. They should also be told about the payment of allowance and any fee while investigations are continuing.
7. A council shall not allow the placement of a child with a particular person to continue if it appears to them that the placement is no longer the most suitable way of performing their duty. Where it appears to an authority that to continue a placement would be harmful to the welfare of the child concerned, the council shall remove the child forthwith.
8. The fostering minimum standards say “Allegations against people that work with children or members of the fostering household are reported by the fostering service to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO). This includes allegations that on the face of it may appear relatively insignificant or that have also been reported directly to the police or Children and Family Services.”
9. One of the standards for fostering services is to “ensure that a clear distinction is made between investigation into allegations of harm and discussions over standards of care. Investigations which find no evidence of harm should not become procedures looking into poor standards of care - these should be treated separately.”
10. It will be a matter of professional judgement for the social worker, based on their knowledge of the child and carer, that the child’s welfare is not being adequately safeguarded. Children cannot always describe unhappiness so understanding what the child’s daily life in the placement is like; routine, mealtimes and whether the foster child is treated the same way as the birth children, is key to understanding what may be having a negative impact on the child.

Child protection

11. Councils have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
12. Under section 47 of the Children Act 1989, where a council has reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm, it has a duty to make such enquiries as it considers necessary to decide whether to take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. Such enquiries should be initiated where there are concerns about abuse or neglect.
13. Councils should act decisively to protect children from abuse and neglect including starting care proceedings where existing interventions are insufficient.

Third party information

14. Miss X’s complaint involves the actions of a third party, Y and Z’s foster carer. To investigate the complaint, I have had access to the relevant information, but I could not share this information with Miss X.
15. The following is not intended to be a full account of everything that happened in this period, nor does it refer to all the records I have considered. It is a summary of the key events and facts relevant to this complaint that I can share.

What happened

16. At the time of the complaint, Miss X’s children, Y and Z, had been in foster care for several years with the same foster carer. Miss X had family time with her children which the foster carer supervised. In late 2024 Miss X complained to the Council over the foster carer’s conduct. She said she felt the foster carer was being overly restrictive. In particular, the foster carer had removed Y’s access to online devices as they were concerned Y did not understand how to stay safe online. Miss X asked for an urgent meeting to discuss the situation.
17. The Council spoke to Miss X on the phone in early January 2025, visited Y in school and held a professionals’ meeting which involved the LADO. The Council decided to carry out an updated assessment to review the children’s situation. It also discussed the situation with the foster carer and offered feedback to try and improve the foster carers’ relationship with Miss X.
18. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint at the end of January 2025. It said it had spoken with Y and Miss X and agreed a plan going forward. Miss X continued to voice concerns for the children.
19. The Council visited the children and foster carer in February 2025. It continued discussions with the foster carer over the care of Y and Z. It also agreed that the Council would supervise Miss X’s family time with the children going forward. The Council held another professionals’ meeting to discuss the ongoing issues.
20. Miss X continued to voice concerns and escalated her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaint process. In its response the Council said it had listened to Miss X’s concerns and fed back to the foster carer. It said it was completing direct social work with the children to assess their wishes.
21. In early April 2024 Y ran away from the foster carer’s home following an altercation with Z. They went to Miss X’s house. Miss X told the Council the foster carer had hurt Y and locked them outside their home. Miss X repeated the issues had been ongoing since December. The Council spoke to Y and Z and satisfied itself that the foster carer had not meant to hurt Y but had been separating the children when arguing. The Council accepted Y was unhappy in the placement and that the situation could not continue. It started to look for a respite placement for the children to allow it time to review the situation.
22. Y and Z moved to a respite placement a few days later. Following new information received at the end of April 2024 the Council progressed the incident between Y and the foster carer to section 47 enquiries. It extended the children’s stay in the respite placement while these took place. It continued direct social work with the children and carried out a sibling assessment. Miss X remained unhappy and complained to the Ombudsman.
23. The children moved to a new long term foster care placement in June 2025. The Council says the children remain settled in the placement and case notes reflect that Miss X is also happy with the placement.

My findings

24. Miss X first reported her concerns to the Council in late December 2024. The Council immediately spoke to Miss X and commenced meetings and work with the children and foster carer. While Miss X wanted the Council to remove the children from their foster placement sooner, the Council carried out enquiries and acted accordingly and proportionately to the information available at the time. The Council was not at fault.
25. The Council continued work with the children. Following the incident in April 2025 it again considered all the information and progressed to section 47 enquiries. It decided to place the children in respite care and then a new long term foster placement. Miss X says this shows it should have acted sooner. The Council acted on information available at the time. It was entitled to try and protect the children’s long-term foster placement and then explore alternatives when it became clear that was no longer possible. The Council was not at fault.
26. Miss X remains unhappy with the Council’s actions against the foster carer. I am unable to share what action, if any, the Council has taken against the foster carer. However, having reviewed the case records I am satisfied with the Council’s actions. The Council was not at fault.

Back to top

Decision

27. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman