Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to adequately assess her son, Y’s, social care needs. She said Y has not had social care respite to meet his needs. There was fault in the way the Council did not complete the statutory complaints process. It also did not consider combining Ms X’s complaints. This frustrated Ms X and caused her uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and complete the statutory complaints process.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council failed to adequately assess her son, Y’s, social care needs. She said Y has not had social care respite to meet his needs.

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 a Council’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 read Ms X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
6. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
7. Ms X 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

Background information

8. The Children Act 1989, section 17, requires councils to safeguard and promote the welfare of ‘children in need’ in their area, including disabled children, by providing appropriate services for them. All disabled children are regarded as ‘children in need’ and entitled to an assessment under section 17.
9. The expectation of ‘Working Together’ is that an assessment which identifies significant needs will generally lead to the provision of services, but it not the case that there is a duty to meet every assessed need. Whether a service is required is dependent on the nature and extent of the need assessed and the consequences of not providing a service. Councils may use eligibility criteria and take into account their available resources when providing services under section 17 of the Children Act.
10. 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.
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 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, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it.
17. However, we may look at whether there were any flaws in the stage two investigation or stage three review panel that could call the findings into question. We may also consider whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation and review panel, and whether it has completed any recommendations without delay.
18. In February 2022 the Ombudsman issued practitioner guidance on the Children’s statutory complaints process.
19. The Council had an arrangement with another Council, Council B, to complete any statutory children’s services complaints from stage two. This agreement ended in February 2024.

What happened

20. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
21. Y has complex additional needs. Ms X set out several concerns with the Council about its handling of Y’s case. These concerns relate to both Y’s education and social care needs. The Council completed two separate complaints.
22. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of Y’s education in August 2023. She included issues about Y’s social care needs and wanted the Council to consider the matters together.
23. The Council responded in August 2023. The Council said it could not get a new social worker and would meet to discuss the concerns.
24. Ms X asked the Council to complete a stage two investigation in October 2023. She complained about the Council’s handling of Y’s, and his siblings, social care needs. Ms X confirmed she wanted the Council to consider the complaint together. Ms X set out concerns about the social worker and social care impacting Y’s education.
25. Council B assigned an IO and IP in October 2023.
26. The IO completed the stage two investigation in December 2023. The IP agreed with the final report.
27. The Council issued its stage two adjudication response in January 2024. The response provided a finding for each point Ms X raised. It upheld one part of the complaint. The Council agreed with the recommended action to discuss if it could reassess Y’s budget and apologise for the delays. The Council offered Ms X a stage three escalation.
28. Ms X asked the Council escalate her complaint to stage three in February 2024. The Council decided the complaint was about education matters. It advised Ms X there was no stage three in its corporate complaint policy.
29. Ms X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Ms X would like the Council to compensate her for the distress the Council caused.
30. In response to my enquiries the Council at first stated Ms X did not request a stage two. Ms X did request a stage two and got a response from Council B.
31. The Council then provided evidence of the stage two investigation and stated it considered Ms X’s stage three complaint was mainly about education, so did not continue the statutory complaint procedure.

My findings

32. The children’s statutory complaints procedure is a statutory procedure the Council has to follow. As set out in paragraph 16, where a council has investigated a complaint under the statutory children’s complaint process, we would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider the investigation was flawed.
33. Ms X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage three after she received the Council’s statutory complaint stage two response. Even though she did speak about educational matters, Ms X asked the Council to deal with the two issues together and asked for an escalation to stage three. The Council should have escalated the complaint. This is fault and Ms X’s complaint has not finished the statutory complaint procedure.
34. The matters in this case and Ms X’s education complaint are interlinked. The Council has not evidenced it considered combining the complaints, as Ms X asked. I cannot say the Council would have combined the issues and I cannot say what any result may have been, but the Council did not consider this. This is fault and caused Ms X uncertainty and frustration.
35. The Councils response suggested some confusion in this matter. Council B did not communicate with the Council about Mrs X’s request for the complaint escalation to stage two. I would usually recommend a service improvement recommendation. However, the Council has ended its agreement with Council B, so this is not necessary.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Ms X by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Ms X for the uncertainty and frustration the Councils actions caused. This apology should be in accordance with the Ombudsman’s new guidance Making an effective apology.
• Pay Ms X £200 as an acknowledgement of the uncertainty and frustration the Councils actions caused.
• Complete stage three of the statutory complaints’ procedure.
37. The Council should provide evidence of the actions taken to satisfy the recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Ms X.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman