Summary: Mrs X complained about delays in carrying out a Child in Need assessment for her child, Y and about non-delivery of social care support. The Council was at fault for failing to consider Ms X’s complaint through the children’s statutory complaint procedure. The Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mrs X to acknowledge the distress and frustration this caused. It will now consider Mrs X’s complaint by starting a stage two investigation through the statutory procedure.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about delays in assessing her child, Y for social care support and further delays in putting any support in place. Mrs X is unhappy with the Council’s handling of her complaint about the matter.
2. Mrs X says her family is in crisis due to the Council’s refusal to put appropriate support in place.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Disabled child

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 Chronically Sick and Disabled Person’s Act (CSDPA) 1970, section 2, requires councils, when undertaking an assessment of a child under section 17 of the Children Act 1989, to consider whether it is necessary to provide support of the type referred to in section 2.
10. Assessments should take account of the needs of the whole family. While some services may be offered directly to the disabled child, services may also be offered under section 17 to parents or siblings.
11. If a council is satisfied it is ‘necessary’ to provide support services under section 2 of the CSDPA then services must be provided regardless of the council’s resources.
12. Services which can be provided under section 2 CSDPA include:

• practical assistance in the home including home based short breaks / respite care;
• recreational / educational facilities including community based short breaks; and
• travel and other assistance

Statutory children’s complaint procedure

13. 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.
14. The guidance sets out who can complain and what can be complained about. Complaints about support councils provide to children in need come under the statutory procedure. Parents can complain about that support on behalf of the child and in their own right
15. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. We would normally expect a council and complainant to follow the full complaints procedure before bringing the matter to us.

What happened

21. Mrs X has a child, Y who is of secondary school age and has special educational needs and disabilities. Mrs X said Y had a failed transition to secondary school and suffered with autistic burnout.
22. Mrs X approached the Council for social care support in early 2024 and asked it carry out a Child in Need (CIN) assessment. Instead the Council referred Mrs X to early help.
23. Mrs X asked the Council again for a CIN assessment in July 2024 after a social worker became involved with the family. The Council again refused, deciding Y was instead a child failed by health and education. Mrs X said she was passed around to various departments within the Council but received no help or support.
24. Mrs X complained to the Council in mid-2024 about the failure to assess Y and the family. The Council did not respond until November 2024 and when it did, it responded via its corporate complaints procedure rather than the statutory procedure. It said an assessment was now agreed and it hoped it gave Mrs X what she was looking for.
25. Following the assessment, the Council issued a CIN Plan for Y in January 2025. Mrs X said however there were no outcomes in the plan and no support was offered or put in place. She also said the assessment failed to assess her role as Y’s carer. Mrs X escalated her complaint.
26. The Council responded to Mrs X’s escalation in March 2025. It apologised for not accepting or progressing Mrs X’s 2024 requests for a CIN assessment for Y. It noted Y was now on a CIN plan.
27. Mrs X remained unhappy and complained to us.
28. We invited the Council to consider Mrs X’s complaint under the statutory children’s complaint procedure. However, the Council said its view was that the matter was now resolved as it completed Y’s assessment in January 2025.
29. Mrs X says that to date (July 2025) the family are no further forward. She said Y is a child in crisis and the family need help and support.

My findings

30. Mrs X’s complaint is about a failure to both assess for and the non-delivery of social care support for her child, Y, who is a child in need. The law is clear that when a family is not happy with a council’s actions under Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 then it must reply using the statutory children’s complaints procedure. Not doing so was fault and meant the Council did not handle Mrs X’s complaint correctly.
31. I have considered whether we should investigate Mrs X’s substantive complaints about the lack of care and support provided to Y by the Council. However, I have decided the Council should conduct a stage 2 investigation in line with its statutory duty. This is because:
• 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 complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns.
• The corporate complaint response from the Council does not adequately address the delays in assessing Y since Mrs X first requesting one in early 2024.
• The Council has not addressed the lack of support for Mrs X and Y since early 2024.
• Mrs X says Y is still without adequate support from the Council, six months on from when the Council carried out an assessment. This ongoing injustice warrants investigation under the statutory procedure.

Back to top

Action

32. Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to:
1. Apologise to Mrs X and pay her £150 to recognise the distress and frustration caused by the Council’s failure to consider her complaint through the children’s statutory complaint procedure. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
2. Allocate an investigator and start a stage two investigation into her complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
3. Remind officers to process complaints about the Council’s actions under Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 through the children’s statutory complaint’s procedure.
33. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

34. I found fault causing injustice and the Council agreed to my recommendations to remedy that injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman