Summary: Mrs X complained about the outcome of Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council’s occupational therapy assessments of her children. The Council acted with fault by not considering Mrs X’s complaint under the statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services. But as we do not consider the Council carried out those assessments with fault, we have not asked the Council to reconsider the complaint under the statutory complaints process. The Council should share this decision with staff to ensure learning.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the outcome of Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council’s (the Council) integrated occupational therapy (OT) assessments. She is unhappy they did not agree her son and daughter needed safe space beds. Mrs X also says the OT dismissed her concerns about her son’s sleep issues and head banging, and said he would grow out of it. She says the assessments took too long – five months. Also, Mrs X says the OT did not listen to her during the assessments.
2. Mrs X says the lack of support for her children has put their safety at risk. The family are mentally and physically exhausted and she is now on antidepressants for anxiety and depression. Her husband has taken leave from work due to the stress. Mrs X says she has borrowed £1,700 to pay for the safe space beds herself.
3. Mrs X would like the Council to:
• Apologise to them
• Reconsider the outcome of the OT assessments for her children.
• Carry out service improvements to avoid similar fault happening to other families
• Reimburse the cost of the safe space beds, and the costs incurred collecting them from across the country.
• Make a symbolic payment to consider the impact to the family

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. We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
6. 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

7. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. The Council commissions a social enterprise called Achieving for Children (AfC) to provide certain children's services. The Council retains legal responsibility for provision of these services. As AfC is acting on behalf of the Council I have referred to its decisions and actions as being those of the Council throughout this statement.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on two draft decisions. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
10. 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

Relevant law, policy and guidance

Child in need

11. Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 defines a child in need as a child who:
• “(a) is unlikely to achieve or maintain, or to have the opportunity of achieving or maintaining, a reasonable standard of health or development without the provision for him of services by a local authority under this Part;
• (b) his health or development is likely to be significantly impaired, or further impaired, without the provision for him of such services; or
• (c) he is disabled”
12. If the family is not happy with the council’s action under Section 17, and complains to the council, then the council should reply to that complaint using the Children Act statutory complaints procedure.

The statutory complaints procedure

13. The Children Act 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.

Background

14. Between August 2024 and January 2025, the Council completed OT assessments of both Mrs X’s son and daughter. Mrs X had sought supported for their sleeping and behavioural issues. Mrs X felt a safe space bed would especially reduce safeguarding concerns for both children. In Mrs X’s daughters’ case, an NHS OT also provided advice and support to the Council, as it was an integrated team. The OT decided there was no clinical indication for safe space beds. Also, Mrs X’s son’s sleep may improve with certain support, and as he grew older.
15. On 16 September 2024, Mrs X complained to the Council about the progress of the assessments. The Council considered her complaint under its corporate complaints procedure and shared its Stage 1 response on 24 September.
16. A week later, Mrs X escalated her complaint to Stage 2. By the end of December 2024, Mrs X raised further complaints about delays and the outcome of the assessments.
17. Mrs X approached the Ombudsman on 2 January 2025. Then on 6 January, the Council shared its Stage 2 response with Mrs X.

My findings

18. The Council told me it did not consider Mrs X’s children were ‘children in need’ when the OT assessed them. The Council said Mrs X requested specific equipment so it carried out a targeted OT assessment, rather than a broader Section 17 assessment by a social worker.
19. Both children suffered with behavioural issues, a learning disability and delayed development which impacted their sleep. Mrs X’s daughter also had autism.
20. I accept why the Council decided to carry out an OT assessment, rather than a Section 17 assessment. That was not fault. However, Mrs X’s children are both disabled as defined under Section 17. Regardless of how the Council supported those children, they were still ‘children in need’. Therefore, I consider the matters Mrs X has complained about to the Council fell within the scope of the statutory complaints procedure. Because it did not use that procedure, that was fault. However, I do not consider the Council should reconsider Mrs X’s complaint under that procedure. I will explain why.
21. Mrs X is unhappy with the outcome of the OT assessments. I cannot say the OT’s decisions were right or wrong, but I have considered if they acted with fault when making their decision.
22. I consider the OT carried out a robust assessment of both children’s needs. They considered Mrs X’s views when they met in person and by email. That included evidence Mrs X shared with the OT during the assessment. Also, the OT worked jointly with the NHS within the integrated team, which was good practice. While I understand Mrs X feels strongly about the OT’s decisions, I do not consider they made their decision with fault.
23. Mrs X says the OT assessments took too long to complete. In its complaint response, the Council said it was sorry it took longer than expected to complete the assessments, but the delays were outside its control.
24. I have seen evidence the OT trialled various equipment for the children and sought advice from the NHS to incorporate into the assessments. I agree some of the delay receiving the NHS’s response was outside the Council’s control. Also, there is no statutory timescale to complete OT assessments because that would not be focussed on the children’s needs. So, I am not persuaded the delay completing the OT assessments amounted to fault.
25. Overall, I have not found fault in the substance of Mrs X’s complaints. Also, the Council’s Stage 1 and 2 responses have robustly addressed her complaints. So, I will not ask the Council to reconsider Mrs X’s complaint under the statutory complaints procedure. However, the Council should still take action to ensure staff learn from this complaint.

Back to top

Action

26. Within eight weeks, the Council should share a copy of this decision with all staff dealing with complaints about children’s social care services, to discuss and identify learning around when the use the statutory complaints procedure.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

28. I find fault which caused no injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to ensure staff learn from the fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman