Summary: We have upheld Mrs Y’s complaint about the Council’s delay in considering her complaints under the statutory procedure for children’s social care. The Council has now agreed to progress the complaint under the statutory procedure promptly and consider an appropriate remedy for the delay. This provides a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused so we are satisfied with the actions the Council has agreed to take.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complains the Council has failed to progress her complaint to the third stage of the children’s statutory complaint process.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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

4. I considered information Mrs Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. If we were to investigate it is likely we would find fault causing the complainant injustice because there have been delays in the handling of the complaint. The request was made by Mrs Y for a stage three response in February 2026.
6. A stage three panel should be held within 30 working days of the complainant’s request and after the hearing, a relevant director should consider the panel’s findings and issue the Council’s adjudication within 20 working days. This time has now past without the conclusion of the stage three complaint process, and this would likely lead to a finding of fault.
7. The Council has not refused to complete the stage three part of the process. However, while the Council may wish, or find it helpful, for Mrs Y to provide a statement of dissatisfaction or details of her desired outcome, this is not a requirement of a stage three response.
8. The stage three is a review panel, which considers the adequacy of the stage two investigation. It is not a hearing in a judicial process. It should not generally reinvestigate or consider new complaints, so a further statement of the issues or a desired outcome is not necessary.
9. We therefore asked the Council to consider how it could end the delay in its stage three statutory complaint process.

Back to top

Agreed Actions

10. To its credit the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint. It has agreed to:
• Hold a stage three panel within one month of the final decision;
• Provide Mrs Y with the Council’s stage three adjudication within 20 working days of the panel hearing;
• Review the Council’s process for escalation requests to stage three and ensure no barriers or additional steps are unnecessarily included, such as requiring a complainant to provide a statement of dissatisfaction or desired outcome;
• Consider and provide an appropriate remedy for the delay at stage three of the statutory complaints procedure, we would suggest £50 per month of delay, once the stage three is concluded; and
• Inform Mrs Y of her right to complain to the Ombudsman after completing stage three of the statutory complaint process.
11. The Council should provide us with evidence that the above recommendation has been completed. 

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman