The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Ms X complained her son, Y, did not receive the support he was assessed as needing and the Council did not deal with her complaint appropriately. Ms X says this has caused distress to Y, his family and she has been put to time and trouble to complain. The Council was at fault in the way it dealt with this complaint. The Council should now reconsider the complaint and pay Ms X £150 in recognition of the frustration caused by this fault and the delay.
The complaint
Ms X complained her son, Y, did not receive the appropriate support he was assessed as needing from July 2021 until October 2021. Ms X says this had a significant impact on Y’s wellbeing and the wellbeing of his family.
Ms X complained the initial complaint response missed facts and referred to the wrong timeframe. The Council did not progress the complaint to stage two when this was requested. This has caused distress to Y and his family and Ms X’s time and trouble to complain.
What I have investigated I have investigated the Council’s complaint handling. The final section of this statement contains my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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(i), as amended) 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) 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 read Ms X’s complaint and spoke with her about it on the phone.
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
I considered the Children’s statutory complaint procedure statutory guidance.
Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Background information The issues complained about fall within the remit of the statutory complaints process.
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.
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 investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.
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 days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 days of the panel hearing.
In February 2022 the Ombudsman issued practitioner guidance on the Children’s statutory complaints process.
What happened This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in the case.
Y has a range of needs including Autism and social anxiety. In April 2021, the resource panel concluded Y had an assessed need to be provided with social care support. He was allocated 6 hours support per week from an agency, which started in May 2021.
Ms X raised a formal complaint in June 2021 about a failure to provide short term breaks for Y or agree additional support hours during the school holidays.
In July 2021, Y’s package of care was increased to 6 hours per week in school term time and 10 hours per week during school holidays following a Child in Need (CIN) review.
Ms X confirmed she was not in agreement with the CIN plan as details had been left out. Ms X also requested the actions in the CIN plan were SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time limited).
Ms X contacted the Council by email throughout September 2021 and October 2021 stating the agency had been unable to fulfil the hours stated in the package of care.
At the end of October 2021, Ms X wrote a further letter, following up her complaint from June 2021 and confirming that Y had not received the full allocation of support from July 2021 until the end of October 2021.
In December 2021 the Council responded to Ms X’s complaint at stage one. The complaint was considered and responded to via the corporate complaint’s procedure. The response confirmed some hours were delivered to support Y but accepted not all hours of support were provided.
In January 2022, Ms X requested the complaint was progressed to stage two of the complaints process. Ms X stated the investigation at stage one did not focus on the specific timeframe given, consider all evidence, investigate what was delivered and missed facts in the complaint. Ms X provided evidence of previous correspondence relating to the issues complained about.
The Council responded to Ms X’s request and confirmed a stage two “review would not be beneficial at this time, as we do not feel this would achieve a substantially different outcome to your complaints or that any further learning could be obtained.”
Ms X is not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Ms X would like the complaint investigating fully, the Council to apologise and make changes so this does not happen in the future.
In response to my enquiries the Council stated it appears the complaint was initially allocated to the wrong team and was not therefore dealt with correctly. It considers this was an oversight. As a result, the Council accepts the complaint was dealt with incorrectly. It should have been considered via the children’s statutory process and not the corporate complaints procedure. The Council has asked if it can now be given the opportunity to reconsider the complaint at stage two of the correct process.
My findings
The Council dealt with this complaint through its corporate complaint procedure, but this matter relates to services for a child in need and should have been dealt with through the children’s services statutory complaints procedure. The Council has accepted it is at fault. The Council has now agreed to reconsider the complaint via the correct process.
The appropriate course of action now is for Ms X to complete the statutory complaint procedure which should fully investigate her concerns about the support provided for Y.
The Council’s fault has led to avoidable delay and caused Ms X frustration and time and trouble pursuing this complaint. I have made recommendations for the Council to remedy the injustice caused.
Agreed action
To remedy the injustice caused to Ms X, within one month of my final decision, the Council has agreed to: Apologise to Ms X for the delay and not completing the appropriate complaint investigation.
Start a stage two investigation and complete this in line with the statutory timescales. If Ms X remains dissatisfied after the stage two investigation and wants to escalate her complaint, the Council should progress the complaint to stage three. If it identifies fault, the Council should consider offering an appropriate remedy for any injustice caused. It may wish to refer to our Guidance on Remedies to assist with this.
Pay Ms X £150 as an acknowledgement of the time and trouble she has spent pursuing this complaint.
The Council should provide evidence of the actions taken to satisfy the recommendations.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council leading to an injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.
Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate I have not investigated Ms X’s concerns about the way Y’s needs were met and support he was offered, because this part of Ms X’s compliant has not yet been considered by the Council. Ms X can bring that complaint back to us if she remains dissatisfied at the end of the Council’s consideration of those matters.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman