Derby City Council (24 006 716)
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly consider a complaint she raised about the way the Council completed an assessment of her family and arranged support for her child, Y, through the children’s statutory complaint procedure. The Council failed to complete the children’s statutory complaint procedure which caused frustration and distress. The Council will complete the statutory complaint procedure without further delay.
The complaint
- Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly consider a complaint she raised about the way the Council completed an assessment of her family and arranged support for her child, Y, through the children’s statutory complaint procedure. Mrs X said this caused her and her husband distress and delayed Y receiving the support they needed. Mrs X wanted the Council to properly consider the complaint and improve its service.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
- 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)
- Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
How I considered this complaint
- I read the documents Mrs X sent and discussed the complaint with her on the phone.
- I considered documents the Council provided.
- Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant legislation and guidance
Child protection and Early help
- Under section 47 of the Children Act 1989, where a council has reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm, it has a duty to make such enquiries as it considers necessary to decide whether to take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. Such enquiries should be initiated where there are concerns about abuse or neglect.
- Early help is set out in Working Together to Safeguard Children 2023 as low-level support for children of all ages delivered by through universal services, such as council support, education and health services. Early help is a voluntary approach and requires the family’s consent to receive support and services offered. These may be provided before and/or after statutory intervention.
Statutory children’s complaint procedure
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The purpose of the stage three panel includes to consider the adequacy of the stage two investigation, obtain further advice or information that may resolve the complaint to everyone’s satisfaction and reach findings on each complaint being reviewed. The stage three panel should not consider any substantively new complaints that have not been considered at stage two.
- Where a complaint is accepted at stage one of the statutory procedure the council is obliged to ensure the complaint proceeds to stages two and three of the procedure if that is the complainant’s wish.
What happened
- This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology. Mrs X lives with her husband Mr X and child Y.
- The Council conducted a section 47 assessment of Y in early 2023, after concerns were raised for their welfare when they were in the care of another adult. The Council completed the assessment and concluded that Y and their family could be supported via Early Help services.
- Mrs X complained to the Council about how it had completed the assessment in May 2023. She complained the Council’s assessment was biased, inaccurate and incomplete and the Council had not considered Mr X and Y’s communication difficulties. Mrs X provided 35 points of inaccuracies, disagreement or queries in relation to the Council’s assessment. Mrs X said the Council failed to explain the purpose or process for the assessment and its communication with her was poor. Mrs X asked the Council to consider the complaint in line with the children’s statutory complaint procedure.
- The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint the following month. It said it had recorded the 35 points raised to ensure the family’s voice and views had been heard. It did not respond to the other points of complaint.
- Dissatisfied with the Council’s response Mrs X complained to us. We asked the Council to consider Mrs X’s complaint at stage two of the statutory complaint procedure.
- The Council contacted Mrs X and asked her to confirm what elements of the complaint she remained dissatisfied with. Mrs X confirmed the complaints about the assessment. Mrs X also complained the Council had not referred Y to an agency for support.
- The Council contacted Mrs X in August. It said as a compromise it would reopen the assessment to add in Mr and Mrs X’s views, but not to alter the analysis or decision. Mrs X confirmed that she did not accept that as a resolution. She said it failed to address all her points of complaint including the lack of support for Y, and was not in line with the children’s statutory complaint procedure.
- At the end of September Mrs X again told the Council that she wanted it to consider her complaint in line with the statutory complaint procedure.
- At the end of January 2024 the Council appointed an Investigation Officer (IO) and an Independent Person (IP). The IO and IP met with Mr and Mrs X to confirm their points of complaint in February. The IO summarised Mrs X’s complaint as; the assessment was not factually correct and did not reflect the views of the parent and child accurately, and the Council had delayed in progressing the complaint.
- Mrs X wrote to the IO and said that she and Mr X were not satisfied with the summary of complaint as it only contained two points and did not include all the points of complaint they outlined during their meeting. Mrs X asked the IO to also investigate their complaints that:
- the Council had been discriminatory towards Mr X and Y as it had not properly considered their communication needs or made reasonable adjustments;
- the Council failed to follow process in gathering information and views from Mr X during the assessment and did not explain the process or procedures; and
- the Council failed to refer Y for support.
- The IO completed their investigation at the end of May 2024. The IO partially upheld Mrs X’s complaint that the assessment was flawed in some limited areas, upheld there had been a delay in the Council considering the complaint and did not uphold the Council had been discriminatory. It did not refer to Mrs X’s two other complaints. The IO recommended the Council should apologise for the delay. The IP agreed with the IO’s findings.
- The Council wrote an adjudication letter to Mrs X the following month and apologised for the delay of over a year in considering her complaint and offered her a symbolic payment of £200.
- Mrs X was dissatisfied with the stage two investigation and asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage three of the statutory complaints procedure. She said two of the points of complaint she raised at stage two were not considered and the investigation into the other points was insufficient and inaccurate.
- The Council responded to Mrs X and said the stage three panel could only consider complaints investigated at stage two, and stage two could only investigate complaints raised at stage one of the complaint procedure, and so the stage three could not consider Mrs X’s complaint about process or support for Y. It said in addition the support Mrs X was seeking for Y was not provided by the Council. The Council said on that basis it would not carry out a stage three panel.
- Mrs X complained to us about the Council’s handling of her complaint. Mrs X did not accept the £200 the Council offered as she did not consider it appropriate.
My findings
- The Council began considering Mrs X complaints through the children’s statutory complaint process, and so, in accordance with the statutory guidance, it should have progressed the complaint to a stage three panel when Mrs X requested it.
- One of the Council’s reasons for refusing to carry out a stage three panel was because the panel cannot consider new matters. It said the panel therefore could not consider her complaints about the assessment information gathering process or support for Y. However, Mrs X requested a stage three panel because she felt the stage two investigation had not addressed those two points of her complaint, and that it had been insufficient in investigating the other points. The guidance sets out that is one of the purposes of the stage three panel.
- The Council said in addition to the complaints being new, it did not provide the support Mrs X was seeking for Y and so the panel could not consider that point of complaint further. However, Mrs X’s complaint was about the Council failing to refer Y for support, not its provision of support. On that basis it could have considered that part of Mrs X’s complaint.
- Mrs X also indicated that she was dissatisfied with the Council’s remedy of £200 following the point of complaint it upheld. The stage three panel could have considered this matter.
- The Council’s failure to hold a stage three panel meeting and complete the statutory complaint procedure was not in line with the guidance and was fault. It caused Mr and Mrs X frustration and distress and delayed the consideration of their complaint.
Agreed action
- Within one month of this decision the Council will:
- write to Mr and Mrs X and apologise for the injustice caused to them by the Council’s failure to hold a stage three panel and pay them a symbolic financial payment of £250 to recognise the same;
- arrange and hold a stage three panel to consider Mrs X’s complaint; and
- remind staff responsible for the children’s statutory complaints procedure that where it has considered a complaint through the procedure, it must hold a stage three panel if the complainant requests it.
- 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 I have recommended.
- The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Final decision
- I have completed my investigation. I found evidence of fault causing injustice and the Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy that injustice.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman