Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to consider a complaint under the statutory children’s complaint procedures, relating to its involvement with her as a child. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in that decision. Nor will we investigate the substantive issues Miss X is complaining about. Because we could not carry out a meaningful investigation due to the passage of time or achieve the outcome Miss X is seeking.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council failed to safeguard her whilst under their care from 2007 onwards and then again when a Special Guardianship Order broke down in 2016.
2. Miss X also complained the Council will not help her access housing and this is a consequence of it not supporting her in 2016.
3. Miss X said she received no support and lived with trauma, grief and abandonment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X complained the Council failed to safeguard her dating back to events in 2007. Miss X said she only became aware of the issues after receiving her records from a Subject Access Request in 2025.
8. In the Council’s complaint response, it explained to Miss X that another Council had responsibility for her care. And it said it could not consider her complaint because the events were more than 12 months ago. Given the Council’s responses here, it is unlikely we would find fault it declined to consider her complaint.
9. In any case, even if there was fault in how the Council decided this, we would not investigate the substantive issues Miss X complained about because of the passage of time.
10. The further away in time an investigation takes place from the events to be investigated, the more difficult it may be to establish the material facts with reasonable confidence. In older cases we are less likely to be able to gather sufficient evidence to reach a sound judgement. Even if some evidence is available, we would need to be particularly careful to ensure it is reliable and provides a full picture.
11. In many cases we cannot apply current standards, guidance, or professional expectations to historical situations. It is therefore likely to be more difficult to reach a firm and fair conclusion on whether there was fault.
12. In historical cases it is likely to be more difficult to achieve a meaningful remedy, given the length of time that has already passed, the difficulty in establishing the causality of the injustice that Miss X has said occurred because of the Council’s actions over longer time periods, and changes in the situation of the parties.
13. Finally, Miss X said the Council have not helped her access housing. Miss X has a separate complaint currently with the Council regarding this matter and it is open to her to make a separate complaint to us about those matters, when she has been through the Council’s complaint procedures.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault. Additionally, we could not carry out a meaningful investigation because of the passage of time and cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman