Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a statutory children’s services complaint. We could not add to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council wrongly handled his statutory children’s services complaint. He says the Council were biased, its records were inaccurate and it failed to investigate his complaint properly. Mr X says this caused him distress, led him to have a bad reputation and cost a lot in legal expenses. He wants the Council to increase the financial payment to him and improve its services for other families.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. 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 organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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.
7. 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. Because of this, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it.
8. However, we may look at whether there were any flaws in the stage two investigation or stage three review panel that could call the findings into question. We may also consider whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation and review panel, and whether it has completed any recommendations without delay.
9. I have considered the documents from Mr X’s complaint and I note that:

• The stage 3 panel upheld parts of Mr X’s complaint
• It made recommendations to the Council to improve its services
• It recommended the Council to consider increasing the financial payment to Mr X
• It recommended the Council amend its records to make them accurate.

10. During my enquiries the Council confirmed it has completed all the recommendations of the stage 3 panel and explained how it met those recommendations.
11. The Council said it spoke with Mr X to discuss the errors in its documents. It said it corrected the records and sent them to Mr X on 17 December 2025 with an explanation of the changes it made.
12. The Council agreed to increase its financial payment to £500. I am satisfied that is an appropriate remedy for the distress and impact this had on Mr X and is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
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 Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because not add to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman