Summary: The Council failed to complete the actions agreed following an earlier Ombudsman investigation within the agreed timescales.

The complaint

1. The Council failed to complete the identified actions within the agreed timescales following an earlier Ombudsman investigation. The Council has not issued a stage two adjudication letter on a complaint made through the children’s statutory complaint procedure. Mrs Y (the complainant) stated this caused the whole family additional frustration and distress and means that her daughter will no longer be able to access the children’s services she was entitled to.

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 discussed the complaint with Mrs Y.
6. I considered the document the Council sent in response to my enquiries.
7. Mrs Y and the Council 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

Children’s statutory complaint process

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 investigating officer (IO) and an independent person (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils have up to 13 weeks (65 working days) to complete stage two of the process from the date of request, or the date the complaint is finalised.
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. 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

13. Mrs Y complained to us that the Council delayed in responding to a complaint she initially made in March 2022, at stage two of the children’s statutory complaint procedure. We upheld the complaint.
14. We issued our final decision on Mrs Y’s complaint in April 2023. The Council agreed to complete the following actions by the end of May 2023:
• conclude stage two of the statutory complaint procedure; and
• apologise to Mrs Y and make a payment of £250 to recognise the injustice caused to her.
15. We asked the Council for evidence it had completed the above actions at the end of May 2023. The Council showed us it had made the payment in April. The Council did not provide any evidence it had apologised or completed stage two of the statutory procedure.
16. We asked the Council for an explanation of the ongoing delay. The Council stated the delay in providing its stage two adjudication letter was caused by the workload of the Adjudicating Officer, which was impacted by a vacancy occurring in October 2022 in another senior role. It had now appointed and trained a deputy Adjudicating Officer to consider some statutory complaints, which it said will significantly improve its ability to deliver stage two responses in line with the statutory guidance.
17. The Council also identified a new process of scheduling meetings between the Adjudicating Officer, the deputy Adjudicating Officer and Statutory Complaints Officer once it receives an IO and IP report to ensure it delivers an appropriate and timely response to the complainant.
18. The Council issued an adjudication letter to Mrs Y at the end of June 2023. It apologised for the delay, provided an explanation for it and agreed with the IO’s findings. The Council told Mrs Y of her escalation rights to stage three of the statutory complaint procedure.

My findings

19. In April 2023, the Council agreed to the actions set out above to remedy the injustice caused by the faults we identified. It said it would complete the actions by the end of May 2023. Although it made the agreed payment it did not provide an apology or the conclusion to the stage two and adjudication letter. The Council is at fault for non-compliance with an agreed remedy.
20. When a council agrees to our recommendations, it should make every effort to comply within the agreed timescales. The Council did not do this in this case. This is a breach of trust, causes uncertainty and frustration for complainants and risks undermining public confidence in the Council.
21. The Council has now completed the agreed actions, three weeks later than agreed. The delay caused Mrs Y frustration and uncertainty, particularly as our previous investigation found delay in the Council’s actions. We have made a recommendation to remedy the additional injustice the Council’s non-compliance caused to Mrs Y.
22. The Council has now issued its stage two response and has provided Mrs Y with her right to progress to the third stage of the statutory complaint procedure if she remains dissatisfied. That is the correct process to follow.
23. The Council has identified the cause of the delay in the statutory complaints procedure and has taken appropriate action to prevent the same faults occurring in the future. I have not made any further service improvement recommendations.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. Within one month of this decision the Council will pay Mrs Y £150 to recognise the avoidable frustration and uncertainty caused to her by its failure to comply with the agreed action following our earlier decision, and her time and trouble pursuing the matter.
25. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation. I found fault causing injustice and the Council agreed to my recommendation to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman