Summary: We have discontinued our investigation into Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s children’s social care service. The complaint has already been independently investigated and there is little we could add. Although the Council caused delays to its complaint handling and to its remedies for Ms X’s injustice, these matters have now been resolved, and Ms X has no remaining injustice which would warrant further investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about various ways in which she was failed by the Council’s children’s social care service. This includes a complaint about inadequate record-keeping.

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. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the council. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. If we are satisfied with a council’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)
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 Ms X and the Council as well as relevant guidance.
7. Ms 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

8. The statutory guidance, ‘Getting the best from complaints’, sets out a three-stage procedure for complaints about certain aspects of children’s social care. I refer to this as ‘the statutory procedure’.
9. Parents of looked-after children can use this procedure to complain about the care and support their children receive. Councils have set timescales in which to respond at all three stages.
10. If a complaint has already been through the statutory procedure, this means the complainant has already had access to an independent investigation.
11. We are not an appeal stage and do not simply add another independent investigation to the previous one as a matter of course. We will not normally re-investigate such a complaint unless we have reason to believe the previous investigation was flawed in a way which disadvantaged the complainant.
12. I have considered the documents from Ms X’s complaint, and I note that:
• All parts of the complaint were considered and addressed by the Council.
• The independent investigator had access to the Council’s records and referred to their consideration of those records where necessary.
• The investigator also interviewed the relevant staff members (in line with best practice recommended in the statutory guidance) and clearly referred to those interviews in their consideration of the individual points of complaint.
• An independent panel reviewed the investigator’s findings. Ms X had the opportunity to put her views to the panel before it made its decision. The panel upheld all but one of her complaints.
• The panel agreed with Ms X’s views about the Council’s record-keeping, and upheld complaints in which the Council could not evidence good practice because of missing records.
• The Council accepted the findings of the investigator and panel and agreed to offer remedies for Ms X’s injustice. It also agreed to make improvements to its service.
13. Because of this, it is unlikely I would be able to add anything significant to what the Council has already said. If I were to reinvestigate the complaint, it is also unlikely that this would lead to a substantially different outcome for Ms X – so I will not do so.
14. I have, however, considered whether Ms X has any outstanding injustice which needs further action.
15. Over the course of Ms X’s three-stage complaint, the Council caused around a month of delays. It apologised for this. The apology was an adequate recognition of the delay and there is nothing I can add.
16. The Council also caused a significant delay in providing the remedies to Ms X which were recommended by the panel. It agreed these in January 2026 but only took action in July after I had made initial enquiries.
17. Although this was undoubtedly a delay by the Council, I am satisfied that it has now completed the agreed actions and that, in doing so, it has provided a suitable remedy for any injustice Ms X may have suffered.
18. Because of this, I do not consider it proportionate to conduct any further investigation or make findings. There is nothing else which can be achieved for Ms X by an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Decision

19. I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman