Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about care provided to the late Mrs B. This is because Mr D has not suffered a significant enough injustice from the care provider’s actions to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr D says on the day he visited Mrs B, carers appeared to be in a hurry and did not know or were unable to provide him with contact details of the company. Mr D says he had to spend time and incurred costs in chasing the company, who admitted care sessions were shorter than required for Mrs B. Mr D wants a full investigation, response, and resolution to this matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs B’s care was commissioned by the Council. The care provider responded to Mr D’s concerns. It could not explain why staff did not have contact details for the company which Mrs B’s partner and next of kin was aware of. It confirmed contact details are included in the welcome pack. The care provider explained of the 126 calls recorded, 18 were shorter than 30 minutes of which 15 recorded valid reasons. The care provider says it will speak to the staff member/s who provided the 3 calls without recording why they were less than the 30 minutes allocated to Mrs B.
6. The care provider apologised if the family’s perception was that carers were trying to rush to call. Further investigation by us could achieve no more than this. While Mr D has had some inconvenience trying to find the care company to make a complaint, his complaint was considered and responded to. There is no significant injustice to Mr D warranting further investigation by the Ombudsman. Although Mr D has not complained on behalf of Mrs B, we could not now provide her with a remedy even if we investigated and found evidence of fault because she is deceased.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr D’s complaint because there is no significant injustice to Mr D from the care provider’s actions warranting an ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman