Summary: The Council accepts it failed to facilitate indirect letterbox contact between Mr X and his grandchildren, who are in care. The Council has apologised to Mr X for this. It has also agreed to pay Mr X £1000, tell the children the reason for the delays, and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that the Council failed properly to facilitate letterbox contact with his grandchildren, who are in care.
2. Despite upholding his complaint about this, Mr X complains the Council has not remedied the injustice and delay in exchanging the letters continues.
3. As a result, Mr X has not been able to access the only form of contact he has with his grandchildren reliably and consistently.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

6. I considered the complaint and the information provided by Mr X and the Council.
7. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
8. Mr X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
9. 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

What I found

Statutory complaints procedure

10. 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.
11. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
12. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils should complete the investigation within 5 weeks. In more complex cases, councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.

What happened

13. Two of Mr X’s grandchildren are in long term foster care.
14. In care proceedings, the court ordered indirect contact between Mr X and his grandchildren take place two times a year. This is often called “letterbox contact” because the contact is in the form of an exchange of letters.
15. Mr X complained to the Council regularly from 2016 that it was not properly facilitating this contact. His most recent complaint was June 2021.
16. In July, the Council responded to this complaint at stage 1 of the statutory procedure. It upheld his complaint and said that the social worker would make sure the letters were exchanged on time in future.
17. Mr X asked for a stage two investigation of the complaint. The Council appointed an investigator in August. The investigator issued their report in November.
18. The stage two investigation found the Council:
• failed and continues to fail to facilitate letterbox contact between Mr X and his grandchildren.
• failed to tell Mr X whether it had shared his letters with the children.
• failed to tell Mr X when the children’s social worker changed.
• failed multiple times since 2016 to follow the statutory complaints procedure.
• failed multiple times since 2016 to provide written responses to Mr X’s complaints.
19. The stage two investigation did not uphold Mr X’s complaint about letterbox contact with his other grandchildren, who have been adopted. This is because the adoptive parents do not have to agree to such contact. The Council will keep Mr X’s letters should the children seek to access their files in adulthood.
20. The Council wrote to Mr X in December. It accepted the findings of the stage two investigation. It agreed to apologise and ensure Mr X received letters from his grandchildren twice a year in line with the court order.
21. The Council said it recognised that it needed to improve its practice in facilitating indirect contact. To achieve this, the Council delivered a Learning Briefing to managers. It would then conduct an audit in 2022 to ensure the learning resulted in improvement.
22. The Council said it had improved its complaint handling. It had trained its managers to make sure complaints are logged and responded to within 20 working days.

My findings

23. If a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider the investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.
24. In this case, the stage two investigation upheld most of Mr X’s complaint. I have not, therefore, reinvestigated the matters complained about.
25. I have considered the Council’s response to the complaint and whether it has made a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.
26. The investigator noted “considerable and unreasonable delay” in completing the stage two investigation “due to the lack of cooperation” from Council staff. The investigator said the issues in this complaint were not complex. This means the stage two should have been completed in five weeks. Instead, it took over 13 weeks. This is fault.
27. The Council has identified ways to improve its service. This is welcome. I do not, however, consider, it has remedied the injustice to Mr X from the faults identified.
28. Mr X has been to significant time and trouble over many years trying to ensure the Council properly promotes the court ordered contact. The Council often overlooked and did not respond to his complaints. This is an injustice to Mr X.
29. The Council also promised Mr X more than once that it would make sure it exchanged the letters on time in future. It failed to do so. This undermined Mr X’s trust in the Council and caused him avoidable frustration. This is an injustice to Mr X.
30. The letters are the only contact Mr X has with his grandchildren. Mr X says he told the children he would always be there for them. The missed and delayed letters might have given the children the impression that Mr X did not want to write to them. This is a significant injustice to Mr X. It may also have caused injustice to the children.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. To remedy the injustice to Mr X, the Council has agreed to:
• Pay Mr X £500 in recognition of his avoidable time and trouble and frustration.
• Pay Mr X £500 in recognition of his avoidable distress over several years.
• Make the children aware, through the Independent Reviewing Officer or life story work, that the missed and delayed letters were the fault of the Council and not because Mr X did not want to write to them.
• Agree a process with Mr X, the children, and their foster carers about how the letterbox contact will be facilitated. Mr X, the foster carers, the IRO, and the Council should each have a copy of this in writing.
32. The Council should take this action within six weeks of my final decision.
33. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Remind relevant staff they should cooperate with statutory complaint investigations in a timely manner.
• Identify and implement a way to facilitate indirect contact between children in care and their families that is resilient to changes in staffing.
34. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within three months of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman