Summary: We have upheld Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled her complaint about the short breaks allocation for her disabled child. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has agreed a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council:
• Incorrectly reduced the short breaks allocation for her disabled child.
• Is not compliant with legislation regarding short breaks for disabled children and their families.
• Delayed responding to her complaint and did not follow statutory guidance.
2. Miss X says this has caused distress and has negatively impacted the well-being of her and her family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and s34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. In 2022 Miss X’s disabled child, Y, was allocated funding to access short breaks. The Council reviewed the allocation in 2024 and decided that Y did not qualify for support. When Miss X complained, the Council undertook two further reviews in January 2025 and decided Y did qualify for support, but the funding allocated was significantly lower than before. Miss X complained the policy had not changed during this period and Y’s needs had increased, not decreased.
7. Miss X made a formal complaint to the Council in April 2025. The Council responded in May 2025 through its corporate complaints process. In June 2025, Miss X requested her complaint be considered at Stage 2 of the statutory children’s complaints process. The Council delayed starting the Stage 2 investigation because it incorrectly insisted on agreeing a statement of complaint. The Stage 2 investigation concluded in December 2025, approx. 65 working days longer than it should have done. The Council failed to inform Miss X of her right to request a Stage 3 Review Panel at this stage. The Adjudicating Officer for the Council also failed to check that the recommendations made at Stage 2 were implemented.

Back to top

Agreed Action

8. The Council has agreed to do the following:
• Apologise to Miss X for its Stage 2 investigation taking 65 working days more than it should have done and make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty this delay would have caused.
• Arrange to pay Miss X the remedy it had offered during the Stage 2 Investigation.
• Apologise to Miss X for not informing her of her right to request a Stage 3 Review Panel and make a further symbolic payment to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused by this delay.
• Offer Miss X a Stage 3 Review Panel and, if she accepts, ensure this takes place within 4 weeks of my Final Decision.
• Ensure the Adjudicating Officer for this case personally reviews whether the recommendations made at Stage 2 have been implemented.
• Update all standardised letters and documents to ensure that complainants are advised of their right to request a Stage 3 Review Panel once Stage 2 has concluded.
• Provide training to all involved in Statutory Children’s Complaints.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We have upheld Miss X’s complaint about how the Council handled her complaint about the short breaks allocation for her disabled child. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has agreed a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman