Summary: The Council was at fault for a significant delay in responding to Ms X’s complaint. It has now agreed to issue its response and to make a symbolic payment to recognise her distress.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council has delayed its response to her 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 Ms X and the Council as well as relevant guidance.
6. 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

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.
13. The Council agreed to investigate Ms X’s stage 2 complaint in March 2025, so it should have responded by late June.
14. Instead, the investigation remains ongoing.
15. The Council is at fault for this significant delay. It has provided reasons, such as difficulties relating to Ms X’s communication needs. There was also a prolonged delay in agreeing a statement of complaint with Ms X. But none of these reasons affect the Council’s timeliness duty, or the injustice the delay has caused her.
16. Neither the independent investigator nor the Council have proposed a deadline for the stage 2 adjudication letter. But the Council says the investigator is “nearing the end” of her investigation, which is encouraging.
17. This matter must now be resolved without further delay. The Council should also offer remedies to Ms X for her injustice.

Back to top

Action

18. Within six weeks, the Council has agreed to:
• Issue its adjudication on Ms X’s stage 2 complaint.
• Apologise to her 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 Ms X.
• Make a symbolic payment to recognise the distress this delay caused her. This payment will be calculated at the rate of £50 per month of delay, up to the date of the stage 2 adjudication letter.
19. The Council will provide us with evidence it has done these things.

Notes on recommended action

20. 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

21. The Council was at fault, and this caused Ms X an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman