LGO criticises two councils over handling of allegations against children of foster carer

The Local Government Ombudsman has criticised two local authorities over the way they handled allegations by a foster child against her foster parent’s children.

Ms S worked for Peterborough City Council as a foster carer but lived in Lincolnshire County Council’s area.

In 2007 a child she had fostered made an allegation about Ms S’s younger daughter. Later that year, she made a separate allegation about the carer’s older daughter.

This prompted Lincolnshire to launch an investigation. The carer was also suspended by Peterborough.

Lincolnshire discontinued its investigation in May 2008, but the outcome was not made clear to Ms S, or to Peterborough.

Ms S complained to Lincolnshire in December 2008, but was told that Peterborough should have provided her with support.

A month later she complained to Peterborough, but Lincolnshire did not provide information which officers at Peterborough wanted in order to give her a comprehensive response.

After conducting its own investigation, Peterborough acknowledged its share of responsibility for the poor way in which the investigations into the allegations had been handled.

In her report, Dr Jane Martin found that the two authorities failed to communicate effectively with each other and to agree how to work together, to ensure that Ms S (the foster carer) was properly informed and supported during an “intensely difficult” period.

The LGO concluded that there were delays in the investigation of the first allegation, and that the two councils did not co-ordinate the provision of appropriate support and information for Ms S.

These failures meant that Ms S had to wait for more than two years for information which might have reasonably been provided to her.

Dr Martin found that this maladministration had caused Ms S unnecessary distress and uncertainty.

The LGO called on both councils to pay her £1,000 to compensate her for the uncertainty and avoidable distress arising from the maladministration identified, and a further £250 for her time and trouble in pursuing her complaint.

Both councils have accepted the recommendations.