Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council safeguarded his great-grandchild and about its role in their care. He also complained about how the Council responded to his children’s statutory complaint. The Council was at fault for delay at stage two and three of the statutory complaint procedure. The delay caused Mr X avoidable frustration, for which the Council will pay £250. It will also complete stage three of the procedure.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council safeguarded his great-grandchild and about its role in their care. He also complained about how the Council responded to his complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. Mr X said this meant his granddaughter only has infrequent contact with his great-grandchild.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future 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 our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered:
• all the information Mr X provided and gave him the opportunity to speak with me;
• the Council’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided; and
• the relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
6. 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

Relevant law and guidance

7. The statutory children’s complaint process was set up to give children and those representing them an opportunity for a thorough independent investigation of their concerns. The Children Act 1989 Representations Procedure (England) Regulations 2006 specify how the procedure should be carried out.
8. The statutory process has three stages:
• The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
• 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 65 working days (13 weeks) to complete stage two of the process.
• 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 working days of the date of request, the panel must issue their findings within five days of the hearing and the Council must issue a final response within a further 15 working days.

What happened

9. Mr X first complained to the Council about its care of his great-grandchild in 2018. The Council began a stage two investigation in mid-2022. Mr X agreed the statement of complaint in early September 2022. The IO completed their investigation in December 2022. The IO upheld nine of Mr X’s complaints and did not uphold one.
10. One of the upheld complaints was that before the involvement of the IO, the Council had failed to comply with its complaint procedures. The IO noted in their findings that the complaints process had been complex and taken too long.
11. The Council issued its stage two adjudication letter in mid-February 2023.
12. Mr X did not agree with the IO’s decision not to uphold one of his complaints and asked the Council for stage three panel in late February 2023. In the subsequent months, he repeated his request and chased the Council for a response several times.
13. Dissatisfied with the delay, Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in June 2023.
14. The Council says it contacted Mr X several times to ask about his availability and on one occasion, with an offer of a potential panel date. The Council said it was hard to get a response from Mr X which allowed it to arrange the panel.
15. In mid-September, the Council again asked Mr X for dates when he was available. Mr X said he no longer wanted to attend the panel in person but still wanted it to go ahead.
16. The Council told me that because of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of its regular panel members had stopped working. This contributed to the delay in arranging stage three panels. It now has a pool of panel members available.

Findings

17. The statutory children’s complaints procedure was set up to provide children, young people and those involved in their welfare with access to an independent, thorough and prompt response to their concerns. Because of this, we do not normally investigate the substantive matter someone complains to us about if their complaint has not completed the statutory procedure, as in this case. I have therefore not investigated Mr X’s concerns about the Council’s safeguarding of his great-grandchild and involvement in their care.
18. Mr X also complained to the Ombudsman about how the Council handled his complaint under the statutory procedure. He said it started in 2018 and was still not complete. As part of his stage two complaint, Mr X complained the Council had not followed its complaints procedure prior to statutory stage two (when the IO became involved). The IO upheld Mr X’s complaint. If Mr X is dissatisfied with the specifics of the stage two findings, he can raise that as part of the stage three panel. I have therefore not considered the issue further.
19. However, it is apparent that the stage two itself was delayed. Stage two investigations should be completed within 65 working days or 13 weeks. Mr X agreed his statement of complaint in early September 2022. The Council did not complete the stage two until mid-February 2023. This was around 22 weeks later; a delay of just over two months. This was fault and caused Mr X frustration.
20. Mr X asked the Council to hold a stage three panel in late February 2023. The Council should have held the panel hearing by the end of March and issued its stage three response by mid-May. As of mid-September, the Council has not arranged a hearing date. The Council says some of the delay has been due to challenges communicating with Mr X. I accept that view, but it is also evident the Council did not take sufficient steps or act decisively enough to arrange the meeting.
21. The Council was therefore at fault for delay in arranging the stage three panel. The fault caused Mr X further avoidable frustration, for which I have made a recommendation below. The Council now has a pool of people who can act as panel members, so I have not made a recommendation to prevent the delay occurring again.

Back to top

Agreed action

22. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will:
• pay Mr X £250 in recognition of the frustration he experienced due to the Council’s delay in progressing his complaint at stage two and three; and
• hold the stage three panel hearing and issue its stage three adjudication letter.
23. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman