Local Government Lawyer

 

Local Government Lawyer

GLD March 26 Planning Lawyer Adhoc Banner 600 x 100 px 1

Newsletter registration

* indicates required
 
 
 
 
 
Practice/Interest Area(s) (tick all that apply)
  •  
Join our other mailing lists (tick to subscribe)

Local Government Lawyer, Info-Gov.uk and Public Law Jobs will use the information you provide on this form to send your requested newsletters and updates. Please tick the box below to authorise us to send the email newsletter(s) and alerts requested above.

 

 

You can change your mind at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in the footer of any email you receive from us, or by contacting us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. We will treat your information with respect. For more information about our privacy practices please visit our website. By clicking below, you agree that we may process your information in accordance with these terms.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has uncovered “unnecessary delays” in a safeguarding investigation carried out by a county council under the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) process.

The Ombudsman also found the process “did not apply policy or set clear timescales for actions to be completed” after the investigation concluded.

The woman behind the complaint, Miss X, complained about the standard of Hertfordshire’s safeguarding investigation under the LADO process following a safeguarding allegation made against her.

She said the LADO failed to use and check available evidence and allowed inaccurate information to be used.

She also said allegations were made against her that she did not have the opportunity to respond to.

While finding no fault in how the council investigated and substantiated the allegations, the Ombudsman found “unnecessary delays” during the investigation.

The report observed that significant delays occurred between key stages of the investigation.

For example, the internal quality-of-care assessment took longer than the proposed four weeks, dragging on to some 19 weeks, without evidence of required monitoring or recording in line with the council’s own procedures.

Further, Miss X was not informed of the substantiated outcome until four months after the LADO process concluded, contrary to the council’s policy that outcomes and actions would be communicated within two weeks.

The Ombudsman said: “The lack of clarity in the actions and application of the policy towards Miss X is fault. It caused Miss X uncertainty and contributed to her feeling disengaged during the investigation.”

To remedy the injustice caused, the council was recommended to:

  • Apologise in writing to Miss X to acknowledge the injustice caused by the faults identified;
  • Review its ‘Managing Allegations Against Adults who work with Children and Young People’ to ensure it allows for clearly defined roles, responsibilities and timescales to be set to keep a person, who is subject to a LADO investigation updated. “This should include how it will monitor any actions after a decision to ensure they are completed within the timeframes set out in its own policies and procedures”.

Hertfordshire County Council has been approached for comment.

Lottie Winson

Sponsored articles

LGL Red line

Poll


 

Past issues

Local Government


Governance (subscribe)


Housing (Subscribe)


Social Care and Education (subscribe)

 


Place (subscribe)

 

Wales (subscribe)

Directory