Summary: We have upheld this complaint about delay in the children’s statutory complaints procedure. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about delays in the Council’s investigation of his complaint under the Children’s statutory complaints procedure. He says this has caused distress and his complaint remains unresolved. He wants the Council to investigate his complaint and improve its procedures.

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 provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services.
6. At stage two 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.
7. Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The adjudicating officer should then write to the complainant with a copy of the investigation report, any report from the independent person and the adjudication response.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. The Ombudsman would normally expect a council and complainant to follow the full complaints procedure, before we will consider a complaint.
11. The Council accepted Mr X’s complaint at stage two of the statutory procedure in February 2025. In May 2025, it decided to close his complaint but did not tell Mr X of its decision at the time.
12. When Mr X became aware his complaint had been closed, he complained about this decision to the Council. In its response, the Council upheld that it had not told him of its decision but explained its reasoning for why it had not done so at the time. It agreed to re-open his complaint. The Council has recently appointed an investigating officer and independent person to investigate his concerns at stage two of the statutory procedure, but there has been considerable delay so far in the process.
13. If we were to investigate, it is likely we would find fault causing the complainant injustice, as the Council has not completed the stage two investigation within the statutory timescales.
14. We therefore asked the Council to take the following action to remedy the injustice caused to Mr X. The Council agreed to our request.

Back to top

Agreed action

15. Within 65 working days of the final decision, the Council will complete its stage two investigation of Mr X’s complaint under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. As part of the investigation, it will consider the delays in the stage two investigation process so far, and whether a remedy is appropriate for any injustice caused by any avoidable delay since February 2025.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman