The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: The Council failed to properly consider Mr X’s complaint through the children’s statutory complaints procedure in line with the relevant law and guidance. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, pay them a symbolic amount to recognise the frustration this caused them and arrange a stage three panel to consider Mr X’s complaint.
The complaint
Mr X made a complaint using the children’s statutory complaints procedure about the Council’s actions following his request for support in respect of his adopted child.
Mr X said the Council failed to properly consider his complaint in line with the relevant law and guidance and this caused him and his family distress, frustration and uncertainty.
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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) 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 34H(1), as amended) Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).
How I considered this complaint
I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.
What I found
Relevant Law and Guidance Statutory children’s complaint procedure 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.
The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask that it is considered at stage two. At this stage 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.
Following the investigation, a senior manager (the adjudicating officer) at the council should carry out an adjudication. The officer considers the IO report and any report from the IP. They decide what the council’s response to the complaint will be, including what action it will take. 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.
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.
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. The council must hold the panel within 30 working days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 working days of the panel hearing.
Early referral to the Ombudsman The Ombudsman would normally expect a council and complainant to follow the full complaints procedure. The guidance sets out the circumstances in which a complaint can be referred to the Ombudsman without completing all three stages. This can only happen when the stage two investigation is robust with all significant complaints upheld. Councils must show they agree to meet most of the complainant’s desired outcomes and have a clear action plan for delivery.
Section 20 Councils have a duty to provide accommodation for any child in need in their area who appears to them to need accommodation because: there is no-one who has parental responsibility for the child; the child is lost or abandoned; or the person who has been caring for the child is prevented, whether permanently or temporarily and for whatever reason, from providing suitable accommodation or care.
Child Protection Conferences If, following a referral and an assessment by a social worker, a multi-agency strategy meeting decides the concerns are substantiated and the child is likely to suffer significant harm, the council convenes a Child Protection Conference.
The Child Protection Conference decides what action is needed to safeguard the child. This may include a recommendation that the child should be supported by a Child Protection Plan.
What happened Stage one investigation Mr X felt unsupported by the Council in managing his adopted children’s needs and made a complaint about this at stage one of the statutory procedure. Mr X also complained they had not been provided with enough information about their child’s needs prior to the adoption.
At stage one, the Council responded to say it could not comment on the pre-adoption documents shared with Mr X because this complaint related to a different council. Regarding respite, the Council said a foster carer had now offered regular respite for Y and it had scheduled a meeting to discuss next steps.
Stage two investigation At the end of April 2024, Mr X asked the Council to consider the complaint at stage two. The Council confirmed in mid-May it would consider the complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
The Council concluded the stage two in November 2024. The points of complaint investigated in summary were: The family had not received sufficient respite; There were delays in providing other types of support for the children; The lack of support meant Mr and Mrs X had to ask the Council to accommodate Y under section 20 of the Children’s Act; and; The Council’s assessments of them and the conferences held under child protection proceedings had not been carried out properly.
The investigating officer upheld less than half of Mr X’s complaints.
Request for consideration at stage three Mr X requested the Council consider the complaint at stage three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. He did not agree with the Council’s findings and said several of the Council’s responses contained inaccurate information.
In January 2025, the Council emailed Mr X to say it had decided the complaint met the criteria for early referral to the Ombudsman as there was a robust report, significant complaints were upheld and there was an action plan to deliver the stage two recommendations. Therefore, Mr X brought the matter to us.
My findings
Mr X complained about the Council’s actions following his request for support in respect of his adopted child. The Council considered the matter at stages one and two of the children’s statutory complaint procedure.
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. This independence is not available to complaints put through the corporate complaints procedure. Because of this, we expect people to complete the complaints procedure before we will consider whether there were any flaws in how the Council investigated their concerns. The Council has not yet considered Mr X’s complaint at stage three so I have not investigated his concerns about the lack of adoption support provided by the Council.
The Council’s suggestion for Mr X to approach the Ombudsman rather than it investigate his complaint at stage three, when asked, was misleading and was fault. This caused Mr X avoidable frustration at an already stressful time. The case did not meet the criteria for an early referral because the stage two investigation did not uphold all the significant complaints. Mr X also raised concerns about inaccuracies in the Council’s stage two response, calling into question the robustness of the investigation. These are issues the Council can and should resolve through stage three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure.
Action
Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to: Apologise to Mr X for the frustration caused by the Council’s failure to investigate his complaint at stage three of the statutory procedure. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings; and Pay Mr X £100 to recognise the same.
Within six weeks of the final decision, the Council has agreed to: Arrange and hold a stage three panel to consider Mr X’s complaint. The panel should consider the robustness of the stage two report and any delays throughout the procedure.
The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Decision I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman