Summary: Mr B complained that the Council had failed to escalate his complaint about children’s services to stage two of the statutory complaints procedure. We found there was a delay of approximately two months in progressing the complaint to stage two which caused Mr B time and trouble in chasing the Council. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and pay him £100.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained that the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (the Council) in respect of his complaint about a child in need assessment, has delayed in carrying out a stage two investigation under the statutory complaints procedure. This has caused Mr B significant frustration along with his time and trouble in pursuing the Council.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
5. 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

Statutory children’s complaints procedure

6. 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.
7. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
8. 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.
9. 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.

What happened

10. Mr B complained to the Council on 17 July 2023 about a child in need assessment. The Council responded at stage one of the statutory complaints procedure on 7 September 2023. It said it was not going to carry out a reassessment and the view of the social worker was a professional opinion supported by the evidence. It would add Mr B’s comments to the case records, so his view was clear. It had offered a meeting with Mr B’s wife and child to discuss aspects of the assessment, but they had declined. It acknowledged it should have shared a draft copy of the assessment with Mr B before it was finalised, but it did not find evidence of discrimination. The response did not detail the next steps for Mr B.
11. On 26 September 2023 Mr B complained to the Council that he was dissatisfied with the response and requested escalation to the next stage. The Council acknowledged his correspondence the next day and explained the action it had taken. It said the complaint had been logged with the complaints department who would advise him of the next steps. But he did not receive any further reply.
12. Mr B chased the Council on 10 October and 1 November 2023 and complained to us on 13 November 2023. On 17 November 2023 the Council confirmed that Mr B’s complaint had only been through stage one of the complaints procedure but did not acknowledge he had requested an escalation to stage two. We referred the complaint back to Mr B advising him to complete the complaints process.
13. Mr B chased the Council again on 21 November 2023 and in early December 2023 provided us with evidence of his attempts to escalate the complaint to stage two. The Council acknowledged Mr B’s request on 4 December 2023 and said it was progressing the complaint to stage two of the complaints procedure
14. We requested information from the Council three more times in December 2023. The Council sent us a copy of the stage two acknowledgement in early January 2024. On 3 January 2024 we asked the Council to apologise to Mr B and pay him £100 for the time and trouble he had experienced in chasing the Council between 27 September and 4 December 2023 (approximately two months).
15. The Council did not respond so we decided to investigate. In response to my enquiries the Council said Mr B’s escalation request from September 2023 was unfortunately overlooked. It said once it had been brought to the Council’s attention on 17 November 2023 it asked Mr B for more information and then progressed the matter to stage two of the complaints procedure, appointing an Investigating Officer and Independent Person. It said between 10 January and 15 February 2024 Mr B stopped communicating with the Council due to an email issue, but the stage two investigation was now progressing.

Back to top

Agreed action

16. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and pay him £100 for his time and trouble. The Council should do this within one month of my final decision and provide us with evidence it has done so.
17. Mr B felt £1000 was a more appropriate amount. I consider £100 is a reasonable symbolic payment for the injustice caused by a two-month delay and in line with our Guidance on Remedies.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I consider this is a proportionate way of putting right the injustice caused to Mr B and I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman