Grandparents frustrated by court case delays

What happened

A case involving Mr and Mrs B's grandchild was referred to Cafcass in 2011. The case involved a dispute between Mr and Mrs B and their adult child over the residence of their grandchild. The court ordered a wishes and feeling report (a report to find out a young person's wishes and feelings). A family court adviser prepared this but it was strongly contested by Mr and Mrs B. The court then ordered a family assistance order (an order made by a court or local authority that a Cafcass officer assists and advises a family) but Cafcass took no steps to implement this for several months.

In the first six months that Cafcass worked on this case, it allocated several family court advisers to it. Cafcass did not make a case plan and case records were incomplete. When a manager reviewed the case, she decided that the family assistance order was unworkable and returned to court, which ordered a report to evaluate and assess the situation. Cafcass allocated a new family court adviser to the case and she kept the case through to its conclusion ten months later.

Mr and Mrs B complained to Cafcass about the way it had handled the case. Cafcass dealt with the latter part of the case but did not address Mr and Mrs B's concerns about the way it handled the case in the first six months after it was referred.

What we found

We partly upheld this complaint. Cafcass mismanaged the case virtually from the beginning until the allocation of the last family court adviser. It failed to communicate or work with the people concerned as it should have done. As a result of Cafcass's mistakes, there were delays to the case of about four months during a time when there were welfare concerns about Mr and Mrs B's grandchild.

Although Mr and Mrs B were also unhappy about both court reports, and in particular with the comments and recommendations that the Cafcass family court advisers had made, we were not able to look at the contents of the reports themselves as we had found no fault in how they were prepared.

Cafcass should have responded to Mr and Mrs B's complaint about how it had managed the case. As a result of Cafcass's actions, Mr and Mrs B suffered anxiety, frustration and a loss of confidence in Cafcass.

Putting it right

Following our investigation, Cafcass apologised to Mr and Mrs B for the injustice they suffered.