Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council had failed to respond to her complaint about children’s services. We found the Council delayed excessively in responding to and remedying her complaint and considered the complaint through the wrong process. This caused Mrs X significant distress and time and trouble. We welcomed the Council’s efforts to remedy the complaint but it has agreed to offer Mrs X the opportunity to complain through the statutory procedure now and improve its procedures for the future.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained that Somerset Council (the Council) ignored her complaint (made in March 2025) about how it handled the placement of her son’s friend in her care from late October 2024 to February 2025. She was also unhappy with the lack of support (financial and emotional) she received to care for the foster child. Mrs X says the failure to respond to the complaint has caused her 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs X 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 complaints procedures

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. 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.
11. 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.
12. The guidance says that complaints should go through the statutory process if the local authority considers they have sufficient interest in the child or young person’s welfare to warrant the representations being considered by them.
13. 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, we expect people to complete the complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns. I have therefore not investigated Mrs X’s concerns about the way in which she was asked to look after the child or the support provided to her.

What happened

14. Mrs X says a Social Worker from the Council (SW) rang her in October 2024 to ask if she would look after a child (Y) because his own care arrangements had broken down. Mrs X agreed to do so on condition she had appropriate funding and support so she could treat him the same as her own children. She says SW agreed to this. However, she did not receive any regular financial support and struggled to contact SW between the end of October 2024 and the beginning of February 2025, despite chasing her on many occasions. SW did not visit Y during this period or arrange any support for him. They did provide cash payments at irregular intervals amounting to £670.
15. Mrs X complained to the Council on 24 March 2025 after the caring arrangement had ended. The Council acknowledged the complaint in an undated email saying it had been received on 24 April and it would respond by 4 July.
16. Mrs X complained to us in mid-June 2025. We sent the complaint back to the Council to respond to first. It said it would respond as soon as it was able. We chased the matter in September and then passed to our assessment team as the Council had not given any timeframe for a response.
17. As we had received no further update by January 2026, we invited the Council to remedy the complaint by making a written apology to Mrs X along with a symbolic payment of £500 for the failure to respond to her complaint and to consider her complaint immediately under stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
18. The Council failed to respond to this letter so we the case was referred to me for a formal investigation at the end of February 2026.

Response to my enquiries

19. The Council said:
• The original complaint received on 24 April 2025 was not allocated to a manager until 6 May which was outside the Council’s expected timeframe. The manager did not complete an investigation or inform anyone of this. The Council has taken action to improve this process.
• Our letter sent in January 2026 was forwarded to the relevant service but not picked up. The Council apologised for this.
• The Council has responded to Mrs X’s complaint at stage one of its local complaints procedure on 3 March 2026. It apologised for the significant delay in the complaint investigation. It said that SW did not meet the minimum practice expectations for supporting a child in need living outside their family unit between October 2023 and February 2025, their case recording was incorrect and they did not progress assessments and support directed by the Team Manager.
• The Council had approved financial support of £107 per week (the Council’s rate for kinship carers) but it was not paid.
• The Council paid Mrs X £107 per week for the period she cared for Y, minus the £670 of cash payments already received. It also paid £500 for the complaint delay recommended by us in January 2026, making a total of £1542.
• If Mrs X provided receipts it would reimburse her for money spent on Christmas presents for Y. (Mrs X provided receipts in March 2026, which the Council has reimbursed.)
• It had referred concerns about SW to Social Work England as they no longer worked for the Council.

Analysis

20. The Council delayed acknowledging receipt of Mrs X’s complaint for a month and has given no explanation for this. It then failed to respond to the complaint at all for almost a year despite several interventions from us. This was fault which caused Mrs X significant distress and time and trouble. I welcome its recent actions to remedy the complaint for Mrs X and to recognise the procedural failings which led to the complaint.
21. However, while it has taken steps to address the failings of one particular member of staff, there is no indication it has put in place any systemic monitoring of complaints received, to ensure delay and non-response is picked up much more quickly (including correspondence from us).
22. I also note that the Council has responded to Mrs X’s complaint through the corporate complaints procedure and given her the opportunity to request a stage two review. I consider this is the wrong procedure and Mrs X’s complaint should have been considered through the statutory children’s complaints procedure: she was looking after a child following a request from the Council and so had sufficient interest in a child. We requested the Council responded to Mrs X at stage two of the statutory procedure, but it did not do so. This was fault which caused Mrs X injustice as she was denied the opportunity to have a more independent and thorough investigation of her complaint.

Back to top

Action

23. I recommended the Council within one month of the date of my final decision:
• provides Mrs X with the opportunity to escalate her complaint to stage two of the statutory procedure;
• ensures that complaint-handling staff have clear guidance as to the type of complaints which should be considered through the statutory procedure; and
• ensures that there is adequate monitoring of complaint-handling at all stages and processes to ensure delays are picked up at a much earlier stage.
24. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman