Judge critical of councils after boy ‘languished’ in care system

Two councils have been criticised by a family court judge who said a five-year-old boy taken from his parents more than two years ago had “languished” in the care system.

Judge Carol Atkinson criticised the London Borough of Redbridge and the Royal Borough of Greenwich in a written ruling following a hearing at the East London Family Court in Canary Wharf.

She said the little boy had not been “appropriately cared for” by Redbridge council. And she said evidence suggested that there had been a “complete and utter failure” by Greenwich council to provide the family with housing.

Judge Atkinson said the youngster was placed in foster care by Redbridge council in June 2012.

But she said there was “no clear plan” for his future.

The judge said the little’s boy’s parents accepted that they needed help in developing the parenting skills necessary to meet their son’s needs.

But she said by last autumn evidence showed that they were able to resume care of their son.

The judge said the problem was that the couple had nowhere to live – and Greenwich council had an obligation to house them.

She said Greenwich council subsequently found accommodation for the family.

Judge Atkinson said Redbridge Council was to investigate how the youngster was in foster care for “such a long time” without a plan.

And she said Greenwich council should ensure it had systems which enabled it to respond more appropriately to “such emergencies”.

“In my judgment, (the little boy) has not been appropriately cared for by (Redbridge Council) within the care system where for many years he has languished … with no clear plan. It is likely that he will have suffered confusion and some harm as a result,” said Judge Atkinson.

“To its credit, the authority … has recognised the errors in its management of this family.”

She added: “The London Borough of Redbridge have committed to embark upon an investigation as to how this child was accommodated without a plan for such a long time. I am grateful to them for that.”

The judge said Greenwich Council was “unrepentant” about the way that it had handled the housing issue and had maintained that it had “followed all proper procedures”.

But she added: “The evidence before me today seems to suggest that there has been a complete and utter failure of the Royal Borough of Greenwich to meet its responsibilities to provide housing to this family.”

She went on: “I suggest that the Royal Borough of Greenwich ensures that it has systems which enable it to respond more appropriately to such emergencies.”

Judge Atkinson named the local authorities involved in her ruling but did not identify the little boy or his parents.

The judge suggested that the case was an example of a situation where a local authority held “all of the power” and “vulnerable” parents were left “almost powerless” to object.

She suggested that in such cases a child could be “parked” and council staff placed under no pressure to ensure that they were working in an “appropriate and timely fashion”.

But she warned that there would be “nowhere to hide” for councils who failed children in such a way.

Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2014, All Rights Reserved.