e have upheld Mr X’s complaint because the Council delayed considering his complaint at stage three of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X.
The complaint
Mr X complains that the Council delayed considering his complaint at stage three of the statutory children’s complaints procedure.
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 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) 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 information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X escalated his complaint to stage three of the statutory complaints procedure. The Council has said that due to an administrative error, this was not done.
If we were to investigate this complaint, it is likely we would find fault. This is because there has been a delay in the Council escalating the complaint to stage three, causing Mr X distress in the form of uncertainty and frustration.
We therefore asked the Council to arrange the stage three panel to be held within one month and, within the same timeframe, apologise to Mr X for the delay and pay him £200 to remedy the injustice this caused. To its credit, the Council agreed.
Final decision
We have upheld this complaint. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing an appropriate remedy.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman