Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed in considering his application to renew his chaperone licence. This meant Mr X was unable to accept the chaperone roles he was offered and lost income. The Council’s delays and failure to properly consider Mr X’s request for reimbursement of his losses was fault. The Council has now offered to apologise and reimburse Mr X in full. This is an appropriate remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X complained the Council delayed in considering his application to renew his chaperone licence. This meant Mr X was unable to accept the chaperone roles he was offered during this period and lost income. He complains the Council has failed to properly consider his requests for reimbursement and has made an inadequate offer based on an arbitrary assessment of his lost earnings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with Mr X; and
• Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Children performing in public performances or activities under a licence must be supervised by an approved chaperone, unless they are in the care of their parents, guardian, or tutor. Once approved, chaperones remain on the Council’s register for three years. At the end of this period, they will need to re-register. The Council advises applicants to allow up to four months for this process.
6. Mr X’s chaperone licence expired during the COVID 19 pandemic. He says that in September 2021, once events started up again, he repeatedly enquired about renewing his licence, but did not receive a response until January 2022. Mr X then attended the required training in February 2022 and an online interview in March 2022, but did not receive his licence until July 2022.
7. During this period Mr X was unable to take up any offers of work. Mr X chased the Council and potential employers contacted the Council to request dispensations so that Mr X could work for them, but these were not actioned in time for the events.
8. Mr X complained via his local councillor about the Council’s delays in renewing his licence and the financial impact this had on him. The Council’s response noted Mr X had contacted the Council in September 2021 as he had been offered a chaperoning role. It said that at that time it was experiencing staffing shortage due to long term sickness and priority had to be given to urgent licences. The Council apologised that Mr X’s emails had been overlooked and for the inconvenience caused.
9. As Mr X was not satisfied by the Council’s response he asked for his complaint to be reviewed. He provided details of the chaperone roles he had been offered but had been unable to accept between September 2022 and July 2023. And confirmed he had consequently lost the opportunity to earn £1,268.50. Mr X asked the Council to compensate him for this loss.
10. The Council reviewed his complaint and set out a timeline since February 2022. It also reviewed his claim for loss of earnings and identified two events where it had been notified Mr X was required as a chaperone. The Council offered to reimburse Mr X £325 in respect of his lost earnings for these events. It also acknowledged that where other chaperones had been used it could be argued that had Mr X’s licence been issued he could have been utilised. But it was unwilling to reimburse Mr X for these events.
11. Mr X asserts he has evidence of the opportunities he was unable to take up, and that the Council should reimburse his full lost earnings. He has asked the Ombudsman to investigate his complaint.
12. In response to my enquiries the Council says that due to an oversight it overlooked the evidence Mr X provided as part of his complaint. It has now considered this evidence and would like to offer Mr X an apology and his full loss of earnings in the sum of £1,268.50.

Analysis

13. The delays in responding to Mr X’s requests to renew his chaperone licence and in subsequently processing his renewal are fault. Without a chaperone licence or specific dispensation Mr X was unable to accept offers of work and incurred financial losses.
14. The Council’s offer to apologise and reimburse Mr X’s claimed losses in full is an appropriate response.

Back to top

Agreed action

15. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X for the delays in renewing his chaperone licence and for the inconvenience and difficulties this caused.
16. The Council has agreed to pay Mr X £1,268.50 in respect of his lost earnings.
17. The Council should take this action within one month of the final decision on this complaint and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

18. The Council’s delays and failure to properly consider Mr X’s request for reimbursement of his losses was fault. The Council’s offer to apologise and reimburse Mr X in full is an appropriate remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman