Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her family’s social care matters and its handling of her complaint. The Council was at fault in its complaint handling process. This caused Ms X time and trouble pursuing her complaint and she was denied an independent investigation. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the standard of service the Council provided when it dealt with her family’s social care matters. This includes:

• staff conduct;
• allegation the Social Service team holds and shares inaccurate information about her family and
• Council’s failure to deal with her complaints properly.

2. Ms X says the Council’s failings has caused her and her two children significant distress and it has affected their health and well-being. Ms X also says the matter has led to her daughter missing out on key mental health care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I discussed the complaint with Ms X and considered the information she provided. I also considered the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries.
7. I sent Ms X and the Council a copy of my draft decision and considered all comments received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about statutory social services functions. The Children Act 1989 Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006 sets out the three stages as:

• Stage One – Local Resolution
• Stage Two – Investigation
• Stage Three – Review Panel.

9. Section 26(3) of the Children Act, 1989 says all functions of the local authority under Part 3 of the Act may form the subject of a complaint under the statutory complaints procedure. This includes:

• concern about the quality or appropriateness of a service
• delivery or non-delivery of services including complaints procedures and
• attitude or behaviour of staff.

(Department of Education, 2006, Statutory guidance for local authority children’s services on representations and complaints procedures)

10. The statutory guidance “Getting the best from complaints” says:

• If the local authority starts a complaint at stage one, it is obliged to ensure the complaint proceeds to stages two and three if the complainant requests this.
• The complaints manager should arrange a full and considered investigation of the complaint to take place without delay.

11. The Ombudsman would normally expect a council and complainant to follow the full complaints procedure. The guidance sets out the circumstances in which a complaint can be referred to the Ombudsman without completing all three stages. This can only happen when the stage two investigation is robust with all complaints upheld. Councils must show they agree to meet most of the complainant’s desired outcomes and have a clear action plan for delivery.

What happened

12. This chronology sets out key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
13. Ms X has two children: Child 1 and Child 2.
14. In January 2020, the Council’s Children Social Care Services received safeguarding referrals from the Police and an anonymous source. The concerns were about Child 1’s behaviour, the relationship between Child 1 and Ms X and the impact this had on the family including Child 2.
15. The case was allocated to the Council’s Child Protection and Assessment Team. The Council carried out assessments and decided the children needed to have a Child in Need (CIN) Plan.
16. Ms X was unhappy about the Council’s decision to place her children on a long-term CIN Plan. The Council explained its long-term intervention plan was to prevent further similar incidents happening.
17. The Council carried out Child and Family (C&F) assessment and held a CIN meeting. Ms X raised concerns about the C&F and CIN meetings. These included staff behaviour, inaccurate information the Council recorded about her family and the suitability of the services the Council provided.
18. In March 2020, Ms X made a formal complaint to the Council.
19. In April 2020, the Council responded to Ms X’s complaint under its stage one Corporate Complaints Procedure. The Council partly upheld Ms X’s complaint. It agreed it made errors in the C&F and CIN documents. The Council said it would make amendments to the relevant documents. The Council apologised to Ms X for providing her with poor standard of service. It confirmed it would hold a meeting and address Ms X’s concerns about its staff behaviour. The Council also said it would ensure learning was shared with the wider team to reinforce good practice standards.
20. Ms X remained dissatisfied and she asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two.
21. In August 2020, the Council set up a stage two meeting. An Investigating Officer and an Independent Person met with Ms X. The Council said the matters Ms X wished to pursue were outside the remit of the statutory investigation. The Council closed Ms X’s complaint at stage two.
22. Ms X remained unhappy. The Council in its final response letter to Ms X maintained its initial decision. It told Ms X it could not disclose any outcome in relation to actions taken about staff behaviour. The Council said it was inappropriate to consider Ms X’s concerns about the information held in the CIN Plans as part of the statutory complaints procedure. The Council confirmed it would not take further action with Ms X’s complaint. The Council referred Ms X to the Ombudsman.
23. In response to our enquiries the Council said it logged and dealt with Ms X’s complaint under the statutory complaints procedure.
24. The Council said Ms X remained unhappy with how the Child Protection process was started, staff behaviour and inaccurate information on her children’s records. The Council explained it decided to close Ms X’s complaint at the stage two complaint procedure because the Council could not achieve the desired outcomes Ms X wanted.

Analysis

25. Although the Council said it dealt with Ms X’s complaint under the statutory complaints procedure, evidence shows the Council responded initially to Ms X’s complaint using its Corporate Complaints Procedure. The Council then decided to progress Ms X’s complaint at stage two under the Statutory Complaints Procedure.
26. The children’s complaints procedure is a statutory three stage procedure which the Council should follow unless in exceptional circumstances. In cases where both parties are not in agreement the Council should complete all three stages.
27. I have found fault by the Council. Its response to the issues raised has been confused with contradictory and confusing information given about which complaints process it has used. In its response to my enquiries, it accepted the complaint fell within the remit of the statutory procedure but then refused to consider Ms X’s complaint at stage two of the process. Despite Ms X’s dissatisfaction, the Council decided to close her complaint and failed to escalate the complaint as it was obliged to do.
28. By failing to consider her complaint at stage two, the Council denied Ms X an independent investigation. And as a result, it caused Ms X additional time and trouble pursuing her complaint with the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to:

• apologise to Ms X for failing to carry out a stage two investigation of her complaint.
• pay Ms X £100 to reflect the time and trouble in bringing her complaint to the Ombudsman.
• appoint an Investigating Officer and an Independent Person to investigate Ms X’s complaint at stage two of the statutory complaint procedure. The Council should also complete the stage three of the statutory complaints procedure if Ms X requests this.
• remind staff of the importance of following the statutory complaints procedure.

30. Within two months of the final decision:

• train staff on the process of escalating a complaint through the statutory complaints procedure, and the limited circumstances in which the Council is not required to investigate a complaint, or can refer a complaint early to the Ombudsman.

31. The Council should provide the Ombudsman with evidence that the above actions have been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I find evidence of fault by the Council leading to injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

33. I did not investigate the substantive issues listed in Paragraph 1. The Council will now investigate this matter. Once Ms X’s complaint has completed the statutory complaints procedure, she can ask the Ombudsman to consider the substantive complaint if she remains dissatisfied.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman