The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: The Council was at fault for its handling of Mr and Mrs B’s complaints, because it should have processed them under the Children Act complaints procedure and it failed to do so. However, this caused Mr and Mrs B no significant injustice. We cannot, or will not, comment on the remaining aspects of the complaints, either because we have no power to do so or because Mr and Mrs B have already received a thorough response from the Council.
The complaints
The complainants, whom I refer to as Mr and Mrs B, complain about how the Council acted when their children were taken into care.
They say the Council: failed to support the family; pressured them into unachievable objectives; removed their children even after they had done everything asked of them; cut family contact sessions short; failed to tell them when their son, who by that point was in care, went to A&E with a bump to his head; and refused to properly investigate their complaints or acknowledge its failings.
Mr and Mrs B also make staff conduct complaints about their children’s social worker and, subsequently, about workers at the contact centre.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the council. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended) 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(i), as amended) Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information from Mr and Mrs B and the Council, all of whom had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Mr and Mrs B’s complaints about their contact sessions being cut short and about their son attending A&E without their knowledge were addressed by the Council in its complaint response. It accepted it was wrong on both counts, apologised, and told them it would do things right in future. There is nothing I can add.
The same is true of Mr and Mrs B’s complaints about the behaviour of social care staff (such as, for example, the social worker being aggressive and laughing at Mrs B’s mental health issues). It is unlikely I would be able to establish what happened in these complaints and, as the Council has fully considered and responded to them, I will not comment further.
The remaining parts of Mr and Mrs B’s complaints concern the Council’s decision to apply for a care order in respect of their children. This includes complaints that the Council failed to properly support the family beforehand, asked Mr and Mrs B to do unachievable things, and ignored any positive progress they had made.
All these matters were for a court to consider before granting an emergency protection order or care order in respect of Mr and Mrs B’s children. I do not have the power to question a court’s decision, so I cannot question its consideration of the issues raised by Mr and Mrs B.
I can, however, consider whether the Council’s investigations into Mr and Mrs B’s complaints were satisfactory.
The statutory guidance document ‘Getting the best from complaints’ sets out how councils should consider and respond to complaints about children’s social work.
Many social work complaints should be considered under a statutory complaints procedure – a three-stage process which involves an independent investigation and panel hearing. The procedure must be administered under the terms set out in the guidance.
The guidance says matters which should be considered under the statutory complaints procedure include: the attitude and behaviour of staff (while discharging the Council’s statutory functions); a decision by a council to initiate a care order; the effect of the care order and the council’s actions and decisions where a care order is made; control of parental contact with children in care; and applications for emergency protection orders.
All the above are related to Mr and Mrs B’s complaints, so the Council should have dealt with them under the statutory complaints procedure. It did not do so, which meant they were denied access to an independent investigation and panel hearing.
This was fault by the Council.
I have considered whether it would now be proportionate to recommend that the Council re-process Mr and Mrs B’s complaints properly. But I have decided not to recommend this, because: the Council has given them a thorough response under its corporate procedure; they had ample opportunity to put their views to the court when it was making decisions on their children’s cases, and will have had legal representation to help them to do so; and a statutory investigation would now prolong – likely substantially – a process which is already been going on for almost a year.
As a result – although the Council was at fault for its handling of Mr and Mrs B’s complaint – I have found that they experienced no injustice significant enough to justify any further remedial action, and I have completed my investigation.
Final decision
The Council was at fault for its handling of Mr and Mrs B’s complaints, although it caused no significant injustice to them.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman