Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Manchester City Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Upheld Reference 22-008-976 Sector Children S Care Services Category Looked After Children Decided 13 December 2022

View Manchester City Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not listening to X and his sibling’s wishes and feelings about no longer wanting to be looked after children and that the Council will not provide financial support to his appointed carers to enable them to apply for a special guardianship order. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to X and his siblings.

The complaint

X complains the Council is not listening to his and his siblings wishes and feelings about no longer wanting to be looked after children. He complains the Council will not provide financial support to his appointed carers to enable them to apply for a special guardianship order.

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)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

The Council responded to X’s complaint at stage one of the children statutory complaints procedure.

X was unhappy with the Council’s response and asked the Council to consider his complaint under stage two of the statutory children complaints procedure. The Council declined to consider it at stage two as it did not consider there was anything further it could add.

If we were to investigate, it is likely we would find fault causing X an injustice as the Council’s decision to refuse to investigate X’s complaint at stage two was not in line with the regulations and statutory guidance. This is because the regulations and statutory guidance do not allow councils to refuse a stage two complaint just because it thinks there is nothing further it can add. The guidance is also clear that once a complaint has entered stage one, councils must ensure the complaint continues to stage two and three if the complainant wishes it.

We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused by its actions by investigating X’s complaint at stage two of the statutory children’s complaints procedure.

Agreed action

To its credit, the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint and will complete the above to put things right. The Council has agreed to investigate and respond to X’s complaint within the timescales set out in the statutory procedure.

Final decision

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 X and his siblings.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Manchester City Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-018-601 Other
25-014-709 Upheld
25-020-785 Upheld
25-002-304 Upheld
25-006-692 Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation