Judge criticises social service arrangements over runaway children

By The Press Association24th March 2015News EnglandChild Protection, Childrens Services, Custodial Care, Local Authorities, News England

A High Court judge has raised concerns about children in care being held in police custody for too long as a result of going missing and being found.

Mr Justice Newton has suggested that local authority social services staff are not making proper arrangements to collect vulnerable youngsters from police stations.

The judge has criticised one London council and spelled out the difficulties police had encountered in trying to contact social services staff after finding a missing girl in her mid-teens.

He said what had happened in the case – which involved the London Borough of Brent – was “nothing short of disgraceful”.

Mr Justice Newton has raised concerns in a written ruling on that case – published following a private hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London.

The girl was in the care of Brent council and lived with a foster carer, said the judge.

Social services staff were concerned that she might have “fallen into a relationship” with a man and was at risk of “sexual exploitation”.

The judge said late last year the girl had gone missing – and he said he had made an order that she should be found and picked up by police.

He said police had found her at 7:30 pm one evening – and she been left waiting at a police station for more than seven hours until council staff arrived to collect her.

The judge outlined the attempts police had made to contact duty social services staff.

He said police had reached a point of “desperation” – and six officers had “needlessly” been kept on overtime at “considerable expense”.

And the judge said the difficulties which had arisen in the case were “far from unique”.

He said similar problems had arisen recently in a case handled by another High Court judge.

“The police endeavoured to contact the emergency duty team. The only information that was available to them were the details of the emergency duty team social worker, which, of course, the police already had, and who appeared to be quite unable to assist.

“The response was slow, she had received no arrangement details (because none existed), and seemed unable to put any in place. They refused to give details of anybody else in authority,” said Mr Justice Newton.

“The police were able eventually to speak to the emergency duty team social worker, but only after they had called her repeatedly.

“She refused to give the number of anybody in authority and able to take any decision, and in fact it was only, as I understand it, late in the evening that the police were eventually given the number and name of the operations director for social care … There continued to appear to be a lack of urgency.”

Mr Justice Newton said “in desperation” police had called a national council call line based in Liverpool.

“It is a national call line dealing with all manner of emergencies. They had no contact numbers for Brent. The individuals there were unfortunately unhelpful, and refused even to identify themselves,” he said.

“As a result, (the girl) continued to be held in police custody for over seven hours. She was extremely distressed. Whilst I could not fault the dedication and professionalism of the police, it is difficult to imagine a more unsuitable environment.”

He said the girl had not left the police station until around 3am.

“What happened in those intervening hours is nothing short of disgraceful,” said the judge.

“The Local Borough of Brent was told at 19:58 that the order had been executed. The duty team responded half an hour later. When they did respond it was to say that no adequate arrangements were in place, either for placement or transport.

“The police, who self-evidently ought to be dealing with other matters, had two response officers to sit with … this vulnerable young person for several hours whilst the business of a busy police station continued around them.

“It hardly needs stating how inappropriate such an environment must have been for (her). As a result of that, six extra officers were needlessly kept on overtime to cover their duties, at considerable expense.

“The police in this, as in other examples, in my experience discharged their responsibilities with enormous skill and care, not sadly reflected by the local authority.”

Mr Justice Newton said local authorities had parental responsibility for children in such circumstances – and sometimes had to make urgent applications for court orders to protect vulnerable youngsters.

But he said it was “totally unacceptable” for children to remain in custody while “some sort of plan” was “cobbled together” by social services staff.

“If this situation ever arises again each individual can expect to be publicly named and shamed.,” said the judge. ” It is incumbent on authorities to ensure that robust processes are in place.”

He added: “I make it clear that what has happened in this case demonstrates a lack of proper practice and responsibility and must be rectified.”