[2024] UKUT 159 (AAC)

DJB (then aged 40) was approved as a foster carer with the relevant fostering agency in August 2019. She then had three foster care placements (one very short) prior to C.

C, then aged 12, was placed as foster child with DJB in March 2021.

In February 2021, DJB informed the fostering agency that, since January 2021, she had been in a new (romantic) relationship, with B (immediately prior to that, she had not been in such a relationship).

DJB had met B some years before, when she was working as a support worker at a residential school where B, then aged 13, was a residential boarder (DJB was 26 at the time).

At the time of starting this relationship with DJB in January 2021, B was in another relationship with, and living with, a woman who was then pregnant with his child.

DJB asked (at the time of telling the fostering agency about her new relationship with B) that B be DBS-checked to enable him to visit “the home”; and DJB and the supervising social worker discussed safeguarding expectations with regard to C as DJB’s foster child, in particular that B should not be left alone with C. The social worker expressed concerns about DJB’s relationship with B and the speed at which it was developing (such that DJB wanted to introduce B to the fostering household). The social worker reiterated the importance of further checks on B. DJB said that B was willing to undergo a DBS check and any other checks required to become part of the fostering household.

In March 2021 DJB cancelled the request that B be DBS-checked, as she had decided against going forward at that time with the relationship with B, and would be prioritising fostering. DJB told the fostering agency, by way of explanation, that B had refused to leave his (other) partner and newborn daughter.

In early April 2021, DJB’s relationship with B restarted (we make this finding based on DJB’s 1 March 2022 letter responding to the fostering agency’s report).

In September 2021 DJB told the supervising social worker that she had restarted the relationship with B, who had been visiting and “having overnight stays” (this is how the social worker’s February 2022 report put it; DJB’s 1 March 2022 letter said that B left his other partner on 19 September 2021 and then stayed at her house for two nights). DJB told the social worker that she envisaged B moving in and wanted him assessed to become an approved foster carer. The fostering agency responded that they would not progress an assessment of B as a foster carer at that time, but would undertake a “viability assessment” which, if successful, would allow B to have overnight stays periodically. DJB was told that, in the interim, B was not to be left unsupervised with C at any time, and DJB had to inform the agency in advance of when B was visiting – until appropriate safeguarding checks were undertaken. No DBS check was, in the event, completed.

In October 2021 DJB expressed frustration over the delay in checks being completed to allow B to have overnight stays. The supervising social worker and a team manager from the fostering agency visited and made clear that they would need to see the relationship being stable and continuous for over 12 months before they would be willing to begin the assessment.

A new supervising social worker was assigned in early January 2022. They made an “unannounced visit” on 11 January 2022, in the evening, when B was “known to be present”, “to assess the home and family dynamics” (quotations are from the February 2022 social worker’s report); B was not present initially, but arrived late. A remark by B to DJB during this meeting – asking her to remind him what time he had left the house that morning – indicated that B had been staying over at DJB’s house. Questions were asked about the car that B drove, in response to which DJB told the supervising social worker that B had been told to keep his van parked at DJB’s home as the area he was staying in was unsafe.

On 17 January 2022, at the first “viability assessment” between the fostering agency and B, B disclosed that he had received a police caution for ‘malicious communication’ when he was 19 years old, for sending a WhatsApp indecent picture of an erect penis to a 13 year old girl, the sister of B’s ex-girlfriend (aged 19); B had pretended to be a boy he knew the 13-year-old had a crush on in school and sent her messages telling her he loved her; B stated that his intention was not sexual, but because he was angry with the older sister for ending their relationship, and he wanted revenge. B said that he had been open with DJB about this information from the outset, as he knew it would be a problem. The viability assessment then stopped; B was directed to remove his items from DJB’s home and not to visit or have any contact with C. DJB was contacted by the supervising social worker that day and told of the decision not to proceed with the viability assessment for B. DJB said she had only recently been made aware of B’s caution, but B disagreed, saying he had been “honest with her” from the outset.

Further information was sought from the police, who said that B had also received a police caution in April 2021 for exposing himself to a neighbour by masturbating in a doorway using his phone to film himself. (B’s explanation was that he shared these images with an ex-partner and did it outdoors so his then-current partner would not be aware).

The fostering agency and local authority decided to remove C from DJB’s home – this happened the next day (19 January 2022), which happened to be C’s 13^th birthday. DJB opposed the removal and both she and C were visibly upset and crying when it was taking place. In the course of these events, DJB told C about B’s caution, what it was for, and the fostering agency’s reaction to it.

DJB resigned as a foster carer on the following day, 20 January 2022. She was later de-registered.