Summary: The complainant is concerned about the Council’s child protection actions in respect of her child. The Council has considered the complaint under the Children Act 1989 statutory complaint process. The Council has upheld some complaints and offered appropriate apologies and procedural changes. The Ombudsman does not consider that there are any outstanding complaints for him to consider. But he is concerned about the length of time taken to deal with the complaint. However, the Council has agreed the recommended action to remedy the avoidable distress caused to the complainant by this delay.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, complains about the process leading up to, and the start of care proceedings, to remove her son, Child B, from her care. Ms X also complains about the contact arrangements after the Court made a Care Order.
2. The Council has investigated the complaint at all stages of the Children Act 1989 statutory complaints process.
3. Broadly, the complainant says that the Council:
1. took Child B into care unlawfully, and without warning;
2. it did not follow the Public Law Outline procedures properly;
3. it failed to give her solicitor the right bundle, it did not present the full psychiatric assessment to the court and the court ordered the care plan to be rewritten to promote reunification;
4. her solicitor did not represent her properly;
5. the Council failed to do proper assessments;
6. it failed to care for Child B properly, allowing Child B’s hair to be shaved, which the complainant had not agreed to, and the foster carers encouraged Child B to call them Mum and Dad and he has been told that this is his ‘forever home’; and
7. the Stage 2 investigation did not investigate all matters and took too long to complete.
4. Ms X says that, as a result of the Council’s actions, she has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and requires counselling.

Back to top

What I have investigated

5. I can consider the Council’s actions up to the point when the Council started care proceedings. This means the Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints (a), (c) and (d) because these are part of the legal proceedings and the Ombudsman is not permitted to investigate matters within legal proceedings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. We have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
7. The Ombudsman cannot question the decisions made at a multi-agency case conference because they involve other professionals over whom he has no jurisdiction. Councils should have their own complaints process for these types of complaints.
8. The Ombudsman cannot investigate whether social workers are meeting their professional standards of conduct. Complaints of this nature should be referred to the social workers’ professional body, previously the Health and Care Professionals Council (HCPC) but now these responsibilities have been transferred to Social Work England.
9. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. So, once a council makes an application to Court for an interim Care Order or Emergency Protection Order, the Ombudsman has no remit to investigate subsequent actions within the Court arena.
10. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I have read the Council’s complaint documents and Ms X’s written complaint to the Ombudsman. Her preference is to have communication only by letter, or email, so I have not spoken directly to Ms X.
12. I issued a draft decision statement to the Council and to Ms X.
13. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share the final decision statement with Ofsted.

Back to top

What I found

Legal considerations

14. Working Together to safeguard children: A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children’ (March 2015/2018) provides guidance about child protection investigations for all agencies. Social workers have a statutory duty to lead assessments which should be holistic in approach.
15. Section 47 of the Children Act 1989 provides that a council has a duty to investigate, where there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child is, or is likely to suffer, significant harm.
16. Where a council has concerns about the parents’ care of their child, and is thinking of taking legal proceedings (commonly referred to as care proceedings) to obtain parental responsibility, the council should issue a ‘Letter before Proceedings’ to the parents, detailing the concerns and inviting parents and their solicitor (paid through legal aid) to a meeting to provide an opportunity to avoid legal action.
17. When a council considers that there may be grounds for removing a child from the care of parents/carers, they normally apply for an interim Care Order to the Family Court. If the Court considers the threshold criteria are met to make an interim or full Care Order, the council can then place a child with alternative carers.
18. Once in care, the council must regularly review the care arrangements and plan for the child. An Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) is appointed to oversee the council’s care planning and ensure the child’s best interests are met.
19. Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs) set out the multi-agency arrangements for its area. Where a child is suspected to be suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm, enquiries should be made to decide how best to safeguard the child. Normally, there is a strategy meeting involving key professionals, including the Police, which sets out the scope of the section 47 investigation. Multi-agency child protection conferences decide whether the child should be subject to a child protection plan.
20. Working Together to Safeguard Children explains that the purpose of any assessment is:

to gather important information about a child and family;

to analyse their needs and/or the nature and level of any risk and harm being suffered by the child;

to decide whether the child suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm’ (as in Section 47 of the Children Act); and

to provide support to address those needs to improve the child’s outcomes to make them safe.

The Children Act 1989 complaints process

21. The Children Act 1989 and the Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006 provides that, those in receipt of certain services, can make representations or complaints to the Council. A council has to investigate the complaint subject to certain restrictions.
22. There are timescales for the consideration of social care complaints under the above procedures. The guidance Getting the Best from Complaints 2006 provides detailed advice on how councils should conduct investigations.
23. There are three stages to the statutory social services complaints’ procedure. The first stage allows an informal resolution of the complaint. If that is not possible, the complainant is entitled to an independent investigation of the complaint. The Council may also appoint an independent person to oversee the investigation. At the final stage, an independent Complaints Review Panel can consider the complaint.
24. The purpose of a Complaints Review Panel is, among other things, to consider the adequacy of the Stage 2 report, focus on achieving resolution by addressing the complaints and desired outcomes and reaching findings on complaints which are being reviewed.
25. Paragraph 3.12 of the guidance says the Complaints Review Panel “must set out its recommendations to the council on any strategies that can assist in resolving the complaint. These may include financial compensation or other action within a specified framework to promote resolution”.
26. The Complaints Review Panel will send its findings and recommendations to the Director of Children Services for consideration. It is then for the Council to decide whether to accept the Review Panel’s recommendations.
27. If, after receiving the Council’s final response, the complainant remains dissatisfied, he can submit a complaint to the Ombudsman.
28. The Ombudsman takes the view that he should not reinvestigate matters where there is a satisfactory complaint investigation and the Council has provided appropriate remedies for the injustice caused by upheld complaints.

Key facts

29. In December 2015, Child B was made subject to a child protection plan. In May 2016, the Council issued a pre-proceedings letter to Ms X and to the child’s father, Mr Y. Ms X was then entitled to some legal advice and to receive legal aid for this. It is recorded that Ms X did seek such advice. Ms X says that she thought things were going well and she had no idea the Council intended to pursue care proceedings.
30. In early August 2016, the Council applied for, and was granted, an interim Care Order. Child B was then placed with foster carers. The interim Care Order gave the Council the authority to place Child B with the foster parents.
31. Ms X says that the start of care proceedings came as a surprise. She had no warning of this, and only Child B’s father received a text message on the day of the Court’s first hearing. The Council’s investigation records that a social worker visited Ms X at home, three days before the application, but there is nothing recorded that confirms that the intention of applying for a Care Order at Court was mentioned on this visit.
32. The Council has upheld this complaint, accepting that Ms X should have been told of the Council’s plan to apply for a Care Order.
33. There then followed the care proceedings. Ms X was entitled to legal aid to have legal representation throughout the care proceedings. In January 2017, the Court made a full Care Order. There was no specific order regarding contact. What happened during these proceedings are not matters which the Ombudsman can consider.
34. However, in respect of the future, Ms X says that the Court stated “we are unable to reunite Child B with his parents today and we would encourage each of them to build on the positives they have demonstrated and commit to working with the local authority if they wish for Child B to be returned to their care in future”.
35. In January 2017, it was agreed that the local Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) would consider the frequency of contact between Child B and Ms X. In February, CAMHS said that Child B required no intervention from it. The Council went back to CAMHS for further advice. There was then a delay by CAMHS in providing its recommendation. CAMHS suggested, and the Council agreed, that regular contact was not in Child B’s best interests. But there was a delay in telling Ms X this and the Council has upheld this complaint.
36. Ms X and Child B’s father have supervised contact with Child B. The Council provides the cost of travel for this but not all the contact notes have been shared with Ms X and this complaint has been partially upheld. The Stage 2 investigation report, however, highlighted that the Court had not specified the frequency of contact to 12 times per year, as stated by Ms X.
37. Ms X had also asked to attend Child B’s school events, but the Council has decided that this is not appropriate.
38. Ms X’s complaints about the foster carers were considered but not upheld. She was reassured that Child B has not been encouraged to call the foster carers ‘Mum and Dad’. But he may be following what the foster carers’ own daughter calls them.
39. In respect of Child B’s hair, it is recorded that it was very matted when he came into care. Ms X agreed for his hair to be trimmed but she had not agreed for his hair to be shaved or for a shape to be put in.
40. The Council agreed that it would have been better to have consulted Ms X about this and it partially upheld the complaint.
41. In respect of the care planning, the Council considered the case notes were comprehensive and recorded both Ms X and Child B’s perspectives. It therefore did not uphold Ms X’s complaint that her views were not properly recorded or that the notes were critical of her.
42. The Council is considering whether it is appropriate for Child B to have an advocate.

The Council’s final response

43. The Director for Children and Young People’s Services considered the Stage 2 report and the findings of the Complaints Review Panel. He accepted that there had been insufficient communication with Ms X, prior to taking the care proceedings, and that this should not have happened. The Director agreed with the other findings on the complaint.
44. To resolve matters, he apologised to Ms X for the identified faults. He agreed that the Council would write to Ms X about the decision to reduce contact between Ms X and Child B and to ask managers to look at developing guidance for parents, who have supervised contact with their child in care.
45. In addition, the Director was concerned about the length of time taken to complete the statutory complaints procedure, nearly two and a half years to complete, and he asked the Complaints Manager to write to Ms X about this.
46. Subsequently, the Complaints Manager wrote to Ms X, apologising for the delay in completing the complaint investigation. She agreed to review the process to prevent future delays.
47. The Practice Manager also wrote to Ms X to clarify the decision about Ms X’s contact and to clarify that there was a record of her PTSD.
48. The Council has explained to Ms X that the current plan is for Child B to remain in long term fostering. The Council now shares the parental responsibility for Child B with Ms X, but it can decide the extent to which she can exercise her parental responsibility.

Analysis

49. I am satisfied that there is a comprehensive Stage 2 investigation report and the Complaints Review Panel, and the Corporate Director for Children and Young People’s Services, have considered this. Both have reached final decisions on the complaint and looked at ways to improve social work practice for the future.
50. There were some faults by the Council, mainly in respect of the communication with Ms X about the plan to issue care proceedings, a delay in giving Ms X the decision about contact and failing to consult her about Child B’s haircut. The Council has apologised for its errors here. Explanations have also now been provided to Ms X about other outstanding matters.
51. Taking children in care is upsetting for parents but the Council’s duty is to safeguard the child. I am satisfied that the Council has appropriately apologised to Ms X for its shortcomings in its child protection actions and this, along with the action it has taken to improve children services’ practice, is sufficient to remedy Ms X’s injustice.
52. I therefore do not have any further recommendations to make to resolve this aspect of the complaint.
53. However, the Council took too long to complete the statutory complaints process and, even with the explanation provided, I am satisfied that the Council has been at fault here and it has caused avoidable and additional distress to Ms X. The Council has apologised for this delay. But I consider the Council should make a small payment in recognition of the avoidable distress caused to Ms X.

Back to top

Agreed action

54. I recommend that, within two months of the date of the final statement, the Council:

makes a payment of £250 for the excessive delay in dealing with Ms X’s complaint; and

tells the Ombudsman what action it has taken to improve its Children Act complaints procedure to ensure that delays in investigations are avoided for the future.

55. The Council has agreed to these actions.

Final decision

56. I am satisfied that the Council has investigated Ms X’s complaints and apologised for its errors where necessary. The Council has also agreed to make a payment in recognition of its delay in dealing with Ms X’s complaints and to consider procedural improvements to improve its complaints handling. I am satisfied that these actions resolve this aspect of the complaint.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

57. I have not investigated Ms X’s complaints about the Council’s actions during the care proceedings because the Ombudsman is not permitted to do so. I have also not investigated any complaint about Ms X’s solicitor.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman