Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to implement the recommendations of the stage three panel review into his complaint about children’s social care, and that this caused him stress and frustration. We have found that the Council acted without fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to implement the recommendations of the stage three panel review into his complaint, and that this caused him stress and frustration.

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 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

What I have and have not investigated

4. 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 expect people to complete the statutory children’s complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns.
5. Mr X has made several complaints about the Council’s involvement in the care of his children that are at various stages of the statutory children’s complaints procedure, and other complaints are being considered under the Council’s corporate complaints procedure. It remains open to Mr X to bring his other complaints to the Ombudsman when they have completed either complaints procedure.
6. The scope of this investigation is therefore limited to considering those of Mr X’s complaints that have completed the statutory children’s complaints procedure, and been the subject of a stage three review panel, and how the Council has responded to the recommendations.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint and considered the information he provided. I also made enquiries of the Council and considered the responses and documents it submitted.
8. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on a draft version of my decision, and I considered their comments before coming to my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

The statutory complaints procedure

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.
10. As set out at paragraph 5, 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. This independence is not available to complaints put through the corporate complaints procedure. Because of this, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it.
11. 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.

What happened

12. Mr X made a complaint to the Council about various issues about the Council’s involvement in his children’s care. Specific parts of Mr X’s complaint were about the assigned social worker and their manager, how they had treated him and the decisions they had made for his children.
13. Mr X’s complaint was considered at all stages of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The stage three panel meeting took place on 17 June 2024. Mr X attended, accompanied by his son.
14. The Council sent a copy of the report of the panel to Mr X on 24 June. It included six recommendations.
15. A Council director wrote to Mr X on 27 June. He apologised for the failings identified by the panel. He confirmed that the Council accepted all six of the recommendations made by the panel, and would take the actions necessary to implement them.
16. Mr X approached the Ombudsman in September 2024. The Council wrote to Mr X on 6 January 2025 to confirm the outcome of each of the recommended actions.
17. Mr X told me that he was satisfied with the way in which the panel meeting was conducted, and the recommendations made by the panel. He was unhappy with the Council’s implementation of those recommendations, particularly the way in which the recommended restorative meeting had been conducted.

Analysis

18. As Mr X was satisfied with the conduct of the stage three panel, I have focussed my investigation on the Council’s implementations of the panel’s recommendations. However, I have also found that the panel was constituted as suggested in the guidance, that it had due regard to its statutory purpose, and that its findings were shared with Mr X within the statutory timescale.

Panel recommendation 1: Restorative Action meeting

19. The panel recommended that the Council arrange a restorative action meeting between Mr X, the social work team and a fostering agency, to try to repair relationships and promote good communication between all parties.
20. This meeting took place in November 2024. I have considered whether the delay in arranging this meeting, between June (when the stage three panel took place) and November, was fault. The Council told me that the meeting was delayed to allow time for the new social work team manager to establish a relationship with Mr X before the restorative action meeting. Mr X told me that, despite having met twice with the new social work team manager, a constructive relationship had not been established. Whilst the attempt to forge a new relationship may have been unsuccessful, I am satisfied that such an attempt was made, and therefore I am satisfied with the Council’s explanation of the reasons for the delay.
21. Mr X was dissatisfied with the way that the restorative action meeting was conducted. He objected to the repeated use of the phrase “going forward”, when he considers that much remains to be resolved in relation to his outstanding concerns. As the panel recommendation was for a restorative action meeting to be held, which the Council has fulfilled, I am of the view that Mr X would need to make a new complaint about the conduct of that meeting. I understand he has now done so, and he knows how to escalate that complaint if he wishes.

Panel recommendation 2: Completing stage two recommendations

22. The panel recommended that the Council create a timeline for the work that needed to be undertaken to fulfil the recommendations of the stage two investigation into Mr X’s complaint.
23. The outcome of the stage two investigation included four recommendations. One of these was to reconsider holding a restorative action meeting. That action has been completed as set out above. A second recommendation was fulfilled by way of discussion at the stage three panel meeting. The third and fourth recommendations were completed by discussion at the restorative action meeting.
24. I am therefore satisfied that this recommendation has been fully implemented.

Panel recommendation 3: Mediator for meetings

25. The panel recommended that the Council should consider using a mediator for the meetings which initially would be held separately with Mr X, Children’s Services and the foster carers, before attempting a meeting between Mr X and the carers together.
26. The restorative action meeting between Mr X, the social work team and the fostering agency was led by a mediator, so the first part of this recommendation has been completed. Following that meeting, the Council wrote to Mr X to explain that it would not progress the second part of this recommendation, that is, for a mediated meeting to take place between Mr X and the foster carers.
27. I asked the Council why, having accepted the panel’s recommendations in full, it had changed its position. It explained that, during the restorative action meeting, Mr X had made several serious allegations and other highly critical comments about the foster carers. The Council said Mr X has spoken about the foster carers in a negative manner on many occasions in the past.
28. The Council considered that the restorative approach could not be effective if either party was unable to engage in respectful dialogue, or if one party felt coerced into participation. The Council was of the view that a meeting between the parties would not only be inadvisable at this time, but could lead to a further breakdown of the relationship.
29. Mr X told me that he still wanted to meet with his children’s foster carers. He said he was quite capable of remaining respectful in a difficult situation, although acknowledged that he “could be combative” if he felt the circumstances warranted it.
30. It is not necessarily fault for a Council to decide not to implement a panel’s recommendations, if it has good reasons. I am satisfied with the explanation given in this case and do not find the Council at fault. I note that councils do not have powers to compel foster carers to attend meetings with birth parents if they are unwilling to do so.

Panel recommendation 4: Advocate for children

31. The panel recommended that the Council should appoint an advocate for the children as soon as possible.
32. The Council confirmed that an advocate had been appointed and had met with Mr X’s daughters more than once.
33. Mr X wanted the notes of the advocate’s meetings with his daughters to be shared with him. However, gathering information on behalf of birth parents is not part of the advocate’s role.
34. I find that this recommendation has been completed.

Panel recommendation 5: Systemic restructure plan for contact and communication

35. The panel recommended that a “systemic restructure plan around contact and communication” be drawn up with Children’s Services and the Complaints Team.
36. My initial impression was that this recommendation was about communication between the Children’s Services and Complaints teams. I could not see any evidence this had been complied with.
37. The Council explained that no concerns had been raised at the stage three panel review about communication between those teams, and that the recommendation was specific to Mr X’s case. The intention was for the Complaints Team to oversee and assist Children’s Services with the creation of a plan that would enable more frequent (and potentially unsupervised) contact between Mr X and his daughters, and that would also improve communication between Mr X and Children’s Services.
38. This plan has not been implemented as, since the stage three panel meeting, two of Mr X’s daughters have decided they do not currently want to have contact with him, and Mr X has decided he does not want to work with the social work team manager. The social work team will therefore send regular updates by letter instead.
39. I am satisfied with the explanation provided by the Council as to why this recommendation has not been completed, and I find the Council acted without fault.

Panel recommendation 6: Consideration of a reflective practice review

40. The panel recommended that the Council’s Children’s Services Team should consider a reflective practice review to look at how it communicates with birth parents and children who are subject to a Care Order, and what improvements can be made.
41. The Council told me that work was ongoing to improve communication with birth families and children in care, and the lessons learnt from this case would be considered as part of that work. For example, Independent Reviewing Officers now routinely ensure that they talk to parents prior to Looked After Children reviews, and Children’s Services aim to work with families on an individual needs-led basis, ensuring they take young people’s views into account. A meeting took place in February to consider how the Council communicates with birth parents and young people.
42. I find that this recommendation has been implemented.

Back to top

Decision

43. I have completed my investigation with a finding of no fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman