Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions relating to a Looked After Child. The Council has already investigated X’s complaint under the three-stage Children Act 1989 complaint procedure, and it is unlikely we would find fault in the way it conducted that investigation or considered the findings. Additionally, any injustice caused by delays in that procedure has already been remedied by the Council’s offer of a symbolic financial remedy.

The complaint

1. X said the Council mishandled their statutory children’s act complaint and this was evident because the review panel at stage three of the procedure, changed some of the earlier findings at stage two, thus making it unreliable.
2. X said the Council’s failings in relation to the substantive matters she raised during the procedure has caused them and their family a devastating impact. Among other things, X is seeking compensation to the amount of several tens of thousands of pounds.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone is looking for. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it.
8. However, we may look at whether there were any flaws in the stage two investigation or stage three review panel that could call the findings into question. We may also consider whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation and review panel, and whether it has completed any recommendations without delay.
9. I have considered the documents from X’s complaint, and I note that:
• each part of the complaint was considered and addressed by the Council;
• the investigator, at stage two made references to case records and relevant guidance;
• parts of the complaint were upheld, and therefore require no additional scrutiny;
• on the points of the complaint which were not upheld, the findings of the stage two investigator do not appear obviously unreasonable, given the evidence summarised in the report.
10. X said that because the stage three review panel came to a different view than the stage two investigator, this meant the stage two investigation was unreliable. I do not agree. The stage three panel was made of different members who would be able to come to a different conclusion on the evidence it had presented to it, including X’s views on the stage two investigation.
11. Therefore, it is unlikely we would find fault in how the Council conducted the investigation or considered the findings at stage two or stage three.
12. X said the Council failed to respond to stage three of the procedures within the permitted timescales. I note that X has already complained to us about earlier delays, including at stage two and so will not revisit this.
13. The Council has acknowledged delays at stage three and offered X a symbolic financial remedy of £500, which is in line with our guidance and so this remedies any injustice to X caused by delays here.
14. Additionally, we cannot achieve a substantive part of what X is looking for. We cannot provide compensation to the amounts they are seeking. Any financial remedies we can offer are very small symbolic amounts to represent the injustice. We direct persons who are seeking large amounts of compensation to the courts.
15. Given my comments at paragraphs 11, 13 and 14, I will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault and the injustice caused by delays at stage three has already been remedied by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman