Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to investigate his complaints - about the Child in Need plan and the social worker appointed to his children - under the children’s statutory complaint process. The Council is at fault for failing to investigate the concerns under the correct complaints process. The Council will apologise, carry out an investigation under the statutory complaint process and take action to prevent reoccurrence.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to investigate his complaints - about the Child in Need plan and social worker appointed to his children - under the children’s statutory complaint process.
2. He believes this has prevented him from resolving his concerns.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I have investigated how the Council has dealt with Mr X’s complaint. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaint about the content of the Child in Need plan or the social worker’s actions. The Council is best placed to investigate these issues using the statutory complaints process.
4. Mr X can come back to us at the conclusion of that process is he is still dissatisfied with the outcome. We would consider whether the Council properly considered the findings and recommendations made. We do not normally reinvestigate the complaint unless we consider the investigation to be flawed. We are not able to investigate complaints about documents submitted to the court.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. 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

7. I have considered:
• The information provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him;
• The Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided; and
• Relevant law and guidance.
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.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

9. 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.
10. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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

14. Mr X’s children were placed on a Child in Need plan in 2022. In mid-July 2022 he raised concerns about the actions of the social worker appointed. The Council responded in late September 2022. The response addressed Mr X’s complaints and explained that if he remained dissatisfied, he could ask to have his complaint considered under stage two of the Children’s Act Complaints Procedure.
15. Mr X escalated his complaint and raised concerns about the statements written about him in the social workers documents. The Council issued a stage two corporate response in late January 2023 addressing the comments he raised.
16. Mr X informed the Council he remained unhappy with the response it had issued. He also raised new concerns about the report the social worker had written to the court. He asked the Council to contact the school his children attend. He wanted it to discuss the social worker’s actions as he had also raised a complaint with the school about its involvement in the child in need meetings.
17. The Council says it investigated Mr X’s concerns about the court report and accepted there were issues with the language used and the gathering of information. The Council agreed to correct the errors contained within its files around the correct language and recording of events. The Council also wrote a letter correcting these statements to Mr X.

Findings

18. When the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint, it did so under its corporate complaints procedure. The issues Mr X raised in his complaint were about the Council’s actions during the time his children were under a child in need plan. This falls under Section 17 of the Children’s Act 1989. The law requires certain complaints to be considered through the statutory children’s complaint investigation process.
19. As this complaint relates to actions which fall under Section 17, the issues raised should have been considered through the statutory complaints process. We are likely to decide that not using this procedure is fault.
20. Mr X has been left with the frustration of feeling that his complaint has not been properly considered. He feels has affected the resolution of the complaint and the ongoing issues he has had with the custody of his children.
21. During the investigation the Council has acknowledged that it made an error in assessing which process Mr X’s complaint should have gone through. It has offered to apologise, review his complaint under the children’s statutory complaints process and provide staff with information on the complaints process to prevent the fault reoccurring. I consider these to be reasonable remedies for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Agreed action

22. The Council will within one month of the final decision:
• Provide Mr X with a written apologies for the injustice caused by the fault identified above.
• Start an investigation under the children’s statutory complaints procedure and ensure the statutory timescales are adhered to.
• Remind staff of the complaint process and procedures.
23. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to injustice. I have recommended action to remedy the injustice and prevent reoccurrence.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman