Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s actions after it removed her child D from her care. There was fault by the Council which prevented Ms X from receiving a response to her complaint via the statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and consider the complaint via the correct procedure without delay. It will also share our decision with relevant staff, and ensure it is considered by the relevant scrutiny committee and cabinet member.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s actions in 2022 and 2023, after it removed her child D from her care and D became a Looked After Child (LAC). Ms X says the Council:
• did not consider Ms X’s views and wishes about D’s foster and residential care placements, despite her having shared parental responsibility for D;
• wrongly stopped Ms X from having contact with D for a year, without following the correct process or properly considering this decision. It also did not respond to Ms X when she asked for contact with D;
• failed to ensure D’s health, safety, and wellbeing while under the Council’s care. This led to neglect of D’s health needs, injuries, and an incident where D absconded from care;
• did not keep Ms X updated about D’s welfare; and
• did not keep D’s care arrangements under review as it should have, or properly consider whether D should return to Ms X’s care.
2. Because of this Ms X says her and D were caused significant distress. They did not see each other for a year which caused irreparable damage to them as a family. D’s health and wellbeing was neglected while under the Council’s care.
3. Ms X wants the Council to return D to her care, with Council support, and full respect given to the family’s rights.

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 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)
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:
• information provided by Ms X;
• the Council’s responses to Ms X’s complaint;
• relevant law and guidance; and
• the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Jurisdiction and Guidance on Remedies.
7. Ms X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
8. 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

What I found

What should have happened

The statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services

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. We also published practitioner guidance on the procedures, setting out our expectations.
10. The guidance lists who may complain using the statutory procedure. The council does not need consent from the child or young person to investigate a complaint from a person on this list.
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 investigating officer (IO) to look into the complaint and an independent person (IP) who is responsible for overseeing the investigation and ensuring its independence.
13. Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The officer considers the IO report and any report from the IP. They decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take. The adjudicating officer should then write to the complainant with a copy of the investigation report, any report from the independent person and the adjudication response.
14. The whole stage two process should be completed within 25 working days but guidance allows an extension for up to 65 working days where required.
15. 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, and then issue a final response within 20 working days of the panel hearing.
16. 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, or all significant complaints upheld. Councils must show they agree to meet most of the complainant’s desired outcomes and have a clear action plan for delivery.
17. If a council has investigated something under this procedure, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless he considers that investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.

What happened

18. In December 2021, the courts issued a care order that D should become a Looked After Child (LAC) and D was removed from Ms X’s care. Ms X kept shared parental responsibility for D.
19. Ms X has previously brought two complaints to us about the decision to remove D from her care. We did not investigate these complaints because the Ombudsman cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 1, as amended)
20. In mid-2022, the Council decided Ms X should not have contact with D. It planned to review this decision within six months.
21. In May 2023, Ms X attended a Looked After Child review meeting about D. This was the first contact she had with D in a year. The following day she complained to the Council about the conduct of the review.
22. Over the next four months, Ms X continued to complain to the Council about the issues described at paragraph 1 of this decision. The Council met with Ms X twice and issued four complaint responses via its corporate complaints procedure in this time. It accepted some fault in its actions, apologised, and assigned a new social worker to the case. It also said it would carry out an updated assessment for the family to consider whether D should return to Ms X’s care.
23. In December 2023, the Council told us it had completed its consideration of the complaint and we began our investigation.

My findings

The Council’s consideration of Ms X’s complaint

24. Ms X has parental responsibility for D and is eligible to complain under the statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services. The matters Ms X complained about, as described at paragraph 1, are matters which fall within the scope of the statutory procedure, as set out in the law and guidance.
25. Where a complaint falls within the scope of the statutory procedure, the Council must use it. The Council did not consider Ms X’s complaint via the statutory procedure. This was fault. This prevented Ms X from receiving an independent, thorough, and prompt response to her concerns. The Council should remedy the injustice caused.
26. Once the Council carries out the statutory children’s complaint procedure and if Ms X remains unhappy, she can make a new complaint to the Ombudsman. However, where a council has properly considered a complaint via the statutory procedure, we would not normally re-investigate it. We would limit our investigation to whether the Council:
• correctly followed the procedure, within the correct timescales, and if not whether this calls the findings into question;
• considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation and review panel; and
• completed any recommendations without delay.

Recurrent fault by the Council

27. In August 2022, when investigating a previous complaint about the Council (case reference 21018286), we found fault because it did not use the statutory complaints procedure when it should have. We recommended the Council provide training about the statutory procedure to staff dealing with complaints about children’s social care services. In November 2022, we recorded we were satisfied the Council had completed this recommendation.
28. Ms X made her complaint to the Council in May 2023, six months after the Council completed the recommendation to train staff on the statutory procedure. The Council’s failure to properly consider Ms X’s complaint shows this staff training was not successful in preventing recurrence of this issue. I have therefore recommended the Council takes further action to address this.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. Within one month of our final decision the Council will:
1. apologise to Ms X for its failure to consider her complaint through the correct procedure. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council will consider this guidance in making the apology; and
2. commence consideration of Ms X’s complaint at Stage 2 of the statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services, without delay. In considering the complaint, the Council will:
1. consider whether it should offer a remedy for faults it already identified via its corporate complaints procedure; and
2. consider whether it should offer a remedy for delays in its response via the statutory procedure. Our guidance on remedies sets out the Ombudsman’s approach to remedying delay in the statutory procedure.
30. Within three months of our final decision the Council will:
1. ensure a copy of our final decision is considered by the relevant scrutiny committee and cabinet member; and
2. share a copy of our final decision with all staff dealing with complaints about children’s social care services, to discuss and identify learning.
31. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council which prevented Ms X from receiving a response to her complaint via the statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services. The Council agreed to our recommendations to apologise to Ms X and consider the complaint via the correct procedure without delay. It will also share our decision with relevant staff, and ensure it is considered by the relevant scrutiny committee and cabinet member.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman