Summary: Ms B complained that the Council had delayed excessively in completing the investigation of her complaint at stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. This has caused her frustration and distress. We found the Council had delayed well outside the statutory time limits. The Council has agreed to complete the stage two investigation, apologise to Ms B and pay her £350. It has already taken action to speed up the process.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained that the London Borough of Camden (the Council) has delayed and continues to delay in completing its investigation of her complaint at stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure. This is causing Ms B significant distress 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 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)
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

How I considered this complaint

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

Statutory Children’s Complaints procedure

7. 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.
8. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.

What happened

13. Ms B complained to the Council about the actions of children’s services in respect of her child. The Council replied at stage one of the statutory complaints procedure on 8 August 2024. Ms B requested in writing escalation to stage two on 5 September 2024.
14. The Council confirmed it was considering the complaint through the statutory procedure and allocated an IO and IP to the case in November 2024. The IO and IP held a terms of reference meeting with Ms B on 5 December 2024 and an additional one on 21 January 2025. Ms B agreed the statement of complaint on 30 January 2025. The IO received the final batch of documents at the beginning of February 2025. The Council received the draft report on 19 June 2025.
15. The Council said it expects to complete the adjudication process by the third week of August 2025.
16. It said there was a delay finalising the statement of complaint, delays in transferring documents from the Council to the IO, and some delays in arranging interviews.
17. The Council also confirmed three other cases were affected by similar delays. It has taken steps to improve its processes by implementing an escalation process for obtaining complaint information and reminding officers of the importance of adhering to the statutory timeframes.
18. The Council has acknowledged the extended delay and agreed to pay Ms B £350 in recognition of the distress and frustration caused to her.

Back to top

Action

19. I recommend within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council;
• completes the adjudication process and sends the stage two outcome to Ms B; and
• apologises to her and pays her £350.
20. As the Council has already taken action to deal with the excessive delays, I see no need to make a service improvement recommendation.
21. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

22. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman