Summary: The Council was at fault for a delay in responding to Mr X’s complaint. It has now agreed to issue its response and to make a symbolic payment to recognise Mr X’s likely distress. It will also take steps to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council has delayed its response to his complaint about its children’s social care service.

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 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)
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant guidance.
6. Mr 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

7. 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’.
8. Parents can use this procedure to complain about their children’s social care assessment and support.
9. The benefit of the statutory procedure is that the parent gets an independent investigation of their complaint (at stage 2), and, if they wish, an independent review (at stage 3).
10. If a complainant wants to progress their complaint through all three stages of the statutory procedure, then they have the right to do so.
11. The Ombudsman normally expects councils (and complainants) to follow the full statutory procedure before involving us. A complaint can only be referred to the Ombudsman earlier if, following a robust stage two investigation, all significant parts of the complaint have been upheld.
12. Councils have 25 working days to respond to stage two complaints. However, in certain circumstances (such as if the complaint is particularly complicated), this can be extended to a maximum of 65 working days. If the complaint is submitted in writing, the ‘start date’ is when the complaint is made.
13. Mr X made his written stage 2 complaint in early December 2024, so the Council should have responded by late February 2025.
14. Instead, the investigation remains ongoing.
15. The Council is at fault for this delay. It has provided reasons, such as the availability of interviewees and general pressure on resources. There was also a prolonged failure to identify an investigating officer. But none of these reasons affect the Council’s statutory timeliness duty, or the injustice the delay caused
    Mr X.
16. The Council says it can issue its adjudication on Mr X’s stage 2 complaint by the end of November. This forms the basis of my recommendations, along with symbolic remedies for Mr X’s likely distress.
17. The Council has also suggested that some of the service delivery issues it is experiencing are not isolated to Mr X’s case. I have made a further recommendation to address this point, which now follows.

Back to top

Action

18. By the end of November 2025, the Council has agreed to:
• Issue its adjudication on Mr X’s stage 2 complaint.
• Apologise to him for the significant delay. We publish guidance which sets out what we expect an effective apology to look like. The Council will consider this guidance when writing to Mr X.
• Make a symbolic payment to him to recognise the distress this delay likely caused him. This payment will be calculated at the rate of £25 per month of delay, up to the date of the stage 2 adjudication letter.
19. Within 12 weeks, the Council has agreed to write to us, setting out how it will overcome the substantial problems it faced finding an investigator to look at
    Mr X’s complaint. In doing so, it should consider:
• The range of people who may be appointed to undertake stage 2 statutory complaint investigations, as summarised in paragraph 3.6.4 and Annex 1 of the statutory guidance, Getting the best from complaints.
• Actions it will take to expand the pool of investigators it can call upon to consider statutory complaints.
20. The Council will provide us with evidence it has done these things.

Notes on recommended action

21. The Council’s symbolic payment is intended to recognise delays up to the date of its stage 2 adjudication letter, and should not, therefore, be seen as a remedy for any subsequent complaint handling delays.

Back to top

Decision

22. The Council was at fault, and this caused Mr X an injustice, which it will now take action to address.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman