Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s support to Mr X as a care leaver. We could not add to the investigation the Council has already carried out, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not properly support him as a care leaver. Mr X said this meant he suffered homelessness and was not consistently allocated a Personal Advisor. Mr X also complained the Council disposed of his belongings without his consent to do so.
2. Mr X said this caused distress and left him in crisis.
3. Mr X wants the Council to properly support him and to increase the financial remedy it offered him for the loss of his belongings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. I have considered the documents from Mr 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 extensive 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;
• any disagreements between the Council and the investigator are minor and are adequately explained; and
• the stage three panel report appears to reinforce that the quality of the stage two report was satisfactory.

11. Because of this, it is unlikely I would be able to add anything significant to what the Council has already said. If I were to reinvestigate the complaint, it is also unlikely that this would lead to a substantially different outcome for Mr X.
12. I have however considered whether the Council’s proposed remedy properly recognised the loss of Mr X’s belongings. The Council increased the symbolic financial remedy offered to Mr X to £500 which he accepted. As Mr X accepted the Council’s offer, this point of the complaint was resolved by the Council before our involvement.
13. The Council also appears to have taken steps to outline how its service will operate better in future. Any efforts to improve its service are a matter for the Council to decide, not the Ombudsman. Time will tell whether they are effective.
14. For these reasons, I am satisfied that an investigation is not warranted because the Council has already adequately investigated Mr X’s complaint and remedied any injustice arising from it. No further input from the Ombudsman is necessary.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add to the investigation the Council has already carried out, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman