Summary: Mr X complained the Council has delayed investigating his complaint at stage three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The delay has caused frustration and distress and means his complaint remains unresolved. The Council is at fault. It has agreed to hold the stage three panel within 30 working days and pay Mr X £200 in recognition of the frustration and distress caused by the delay. It will also review its procedures.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has delayed investigating his complaint at stage three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The delay has caused frustration and distress and means his complaint remains unresolved. He wants the Council to arrange the stage three panel without further delay.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
4. 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

5. I read Mr X’s complaint and spoke with him about it on the phone.
6. I considered information provided by the Council.
7. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered comments received before making 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 children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, Getting the Best from Complaints, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail.
9. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
10. 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 have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.
11. If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel. The Council must hold the panel within 30 days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 days of the panel hearing.
12. Statutory guidance says the investigating officer and independent person who conducted the stage two investigation should be invited to the stage three panel. However, should any of these person’s availability cause a delay in holding the panel, the Chair should take a view on proceeding without them. The panel Chair should make the final decision on attendees.

Background information

13. The Council accepted Mr X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure in April 2021.
14. Mr X brought a complaint to us later in 2021, saying the Council had delayed completing the stage two investigation. We found the Council at fault. The Council agreed to complete the stage two investigation and make a payment to remedy the injustice caused by the delay. The stage two investigation was completed in May 2022.

What happened

15. The Council sent Mr X its stage two adjudication letter at the end of May 2022. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and in June 2022, asked to escalate the complaint to stage three. Mr X told the Council he could attend a stage three panel meeting on any of three weekday afternoons.
16. The Council tried to arrange a date for the panel but could not find a date and time between August and October 2022 that everyone could attend.
17. By November 2022, the Council had still not arranged the panel and Mr X brought the complaint to us.
18. The Council wrote to Mr X. It said it had identified a suitable panel but had been unable to find a date that suited all parties. It said this had been made more difficult due to his limited availability. It said it would continue to try to find a date and time for the stage three panel that everyone could attend.
19. The Council told us it had difficulty arranging a suitable date but was continuing to try a date that fitted with everyone’s availability.
20. In January 2023, Mr X told us the Council had still not set a date for the stage three panel. He said the Council had not told him before November 2022 it was having difficulty arranging a panel date due to invitee availability. If it had contacted him earlier, he would have tried to rearrange his diary to enable the panel hearing to proceed.

Analysis

21. The statutory guidance says a Council should arrange the stage three panel within 30 days of a request. The Council should have arranged and held the stage three panel by the end of July 2022.
22. I have seen no evidence the Council tried to arrange the stage three panel before the end of August 2022, by which time the 30-day statutory timescale had already passed. This is fault.
23. The evidence shows the Council did try to arrange the stage three panel between August and October 2022. However, it was unable to proceed as it could not identify a date all invitees could attend.
24. I accept that there will be times when availability makes arranging a panel challenging. However, the Council could have done more to finalise a panel date. I have reached this view because:
• Mr X said the Council did not contact him before November 2022 to make him aware of the difficulty or to ask him if he could be more flexible with his available dates.
• Of the 18 dates the Council proposed between August and October 2022, there were 6 dates where all invitees but one could attend. There is no evidence the Council contacted the person who had indicated they were not available on each date to see if, once made aware of the difficulty, they could review their diary to make themselves available.
• There is no evidence the Council considered whether appointing a different panel might be appropriate to increase availability of dates.
• The statutory guidance gives the panel Chair discretion to decide who attends and to proceed without the officers involved at stage two, if availability is causing undue delay. There is no evidence the Council considered this.
25. I am not satisfied the Council made sufficient efforts to arrange the stage three panel. The failure to hold the panel within 30 days of Mr X’s request is fault. The delay has caused Mr X frustration and distress and means his complaint remains unresolved. The injustice is compounded by the fact he has already had to complain to us about delay at stage two of the procedure.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. Within one month of the final decision the Council will:
• Pay Mr X £200 in recognition of the frustration caused by the delay holding the stage three panel and time and trouble having to bring the complaint back to us for a second time.
• Remind relevant officers that stage three panels should be conducted within 30 working days of the request being made and that if officer availability is causing undue delay, the panel Chair has discretion to decide to proceed without them.
27. Within 30 working days of the final decision, the Council will convene the stage three panel. It should then issue the Council’s response to Mr X within 20 working days of the hearing.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault and the Council has agreed action to remedy the injustice caused and improve Council services.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman