Summary: Ms X complains that the Council has treated her daughter unfairly because of her race and disability. We have stopped investigating this complaint because it relates to matters which Ms X has been aware of for several years. This is outside the normal 12-month period for accepting complaints, and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Ms X is complaining on behalf of her daughter, Miss B. Ms X complains that the Council did not appeal a decision made by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). She considers the Council discriminated against Miss B because it appealed CICA’s decision in a similar case. Ms X believes Miss B was treated less favourably because of her race and because she is disabled.

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. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.
5. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. At stage 2 of this procedure, the Council appoints an Investigating Officer and an Independent Person (who is responsible for overseeing the investigation). If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage 2 investigation, they can ask for a stage 3 review. If a council has investigated something under this procedure, we would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider that investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.
6. 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

7. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• considered the comments and documents the Council provided in relation to Ms X’s previous complaint; and
• given the Council and the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. Miss B was awarded compensation by the CICA when she was 14 years old. At the time, the Council and Miss B’s grandparents had joint parental responsibility for her.
9. In 2018, Miss B’s mother, Ms X, complained to the Council about various matters relating to the award, including a lack of support to challenge the amount that had been awarded by CICA. The complaint was investigated by an independent investigator at stage 2 of the statutory complaints procedure. The investigator upheld some aspects of Ms X’s complaint and made several recommendations, which the Council agreed to take. The Council told Ms X that if she was not satisfied with its response, she could escalate her complaint to the third stage of the complaints procedure. Ms X did not do so.
10. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman in 2019 because Miss B had not received the compensation she had been awarded. We found there had been delays by the Council and it agreed to take the actions we recommended. Ms X did not complain to us about the Council not appealing CICA’s decision.
11. In 2021, Ms X complained to the Council again about matters relating to the CICA award. The Council decided not to investigate Ms X’s complaint because it considered the issues she was raising were connected to complaints it had already investigated.
12. Ms X then complained to the Ombudsman. She said that she had found details of a similar complaint on our website which led her to believe the Council had treated Miss B less favourably because of her race and disability. She said the Council had appealed CICA’s decision in that case, but not in Miss B’s case.
13. In the other case, the complaint had been escalated to the third stage of the complaints procedure and the review panel had recommended that the Council ask CICA if it would consider a late appeal. In Miss B’s case, Ms X did not escalate her complaint to the third stage of the complaints procedure. The stage 2 investigation records show that Miss B’s family were concerned that an appeal could result in a lower award. The investigator told Ms X that she would need to seek advice from CICA herself on whether or not they would accept a late appeal.
14. Ms X considers the Council treated Miss B less favourably than the young person in the other case because Miss B is disabled, and the other person is not. The decision statement for the other case does not say whether they are or are not disabled. Ms X also considers the Council put Miss B’s case ‘on the back burner’ and she believes this is due to racial discrimination.
15. I do not consider the other case shows that Miss B was treated unfairly. But in any event, Ms X’s complaint is about the Council not appealing CICA’s decision, which she has been aware of for several years and was part of the complaint investigated by the Council in 2018.
16. As explained in paragraph three, the Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints about matters that a complainant has been aware of for more than 12 months, unless there are good reasons. And, as explained in paragraph four, we cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act.
17. We have discretion to disapply the rule outlined in paragraph three where we decide there are good reasons. I do not consider Ms X has provided any good reasons for not bringing her complaint to us sooner. If Ms X considered the outcome of the stage 2 investigation was wrong or unfair, she could have escalated her complaint to the third stage of the statutory complaints procedure and, if she remained dissatisfied, it would have been reasonable for Ms X to complain to the Ombudsman at that time. I consider we should stop investigating Ms X’s complaint because it has been made late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have stopped investigating this complaint because it has been made late, and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman