Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to consider her complaint about historical allegations of abuse. The significant passage of time means it is no longer possible to complete a robust investigation or provide a meaningful remedy.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to appropriately safeguard her as a child in its care and then refused to consider her complaints about this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. Our Guidance on considering historical allegations says that we will consider each complaint on its merits and take account of the unique circumstances of each case but we should be cautious about starting an investigation into historical allegations, due to the difficulties:
• obtaining sufficient evidence to establish the material facts and reach a sound judgement.
• applying current standards, guidance or professional expectations to historical situations.
• achieving a meaningful remedy.
5. We will only investigate complaints of historical allegations where:
• We are confident that 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have spoken to and considered information provided by the complainant and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X’s complaints relate to the period from when she was a few months old in the mid-1970s to the age of 14 while she was under the care of the Council. Miss X says she was abused by her adoptive parents during this time. She has told me she could not disclose the abuse to the Council at the time because she had nine different Social Workers allocated and did not have the chance to build sufficient trust.
8. Miss X says she requested her records from the Council in 2021 and received partial files in 2023. The contents caused her significant distress and emotional trauma. The Council declined to investigate Miss X’s complaints as her complaint was late.
9. While I appreciate the sensitivity and enormity of the complaint Miss X has made, I must consider the complaint in the context of our jurisdiction and decide whether the two tests set out in paragraph 5 are met.
10. There is an argument that it was not reasonable for Miss X to have complained sooner about these allegations (due to her age, vulnerability and a lack of trust in social workers believing her). But equally it could be said those reasons do not endure with the same intensity for more than 30 to 50 years.
11. Furthermore, I am not confident there is a realistic prospect of reaching a sound, fair and meaningful decision:
• Evidence: The events happened between 50 and 36 years ago. The only evidence available to us will be the case records. We will be unable to ask any staff member for their recollection of the events or their involvement or whether the practice followed at that time was in accordance with the law and guidance. It will be difficult to resolve any discrepancies between those records and Miss X’s recollection of events. I think it is very unlikely that we will be able to determine what happened and why, to a sufficient standard to reach a robust and safe conclusion.
• Context: The law, in addition to the Council’s policies, procedures and practices, has changed significantly in 30 to 50 years and it will be difficult to apply current standards to old events to establish if there was fault.
• Remedy: Given the passage of time it will be difficult to achieve a meaningful remedy as the Council’s policies and practices have changed significantly. It will be difficult to establish clear causality between the Councils’ actions and Miss X’s injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the significant passage of time means it is no longer possible to complete a robust investigation or provide a meaningful remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman