Safeguarding archive 2016-2017


Archive has 149 results

  • Bath and North East Somerset Council (16 006 446)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council failed to conduct two safeguarding investigations without fault and to ensure the terms of reference set reflected the correct evidential test that should be applied to the information gathered. That resulted in a loss of confidence in the decisions taken.

  • Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (16 012 161)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 30-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council was not at fault in the way it considered Mr X's concerns about Mrs Y.

  • Cumbria County Council (16 015 717)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 27-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council's involvement in the enforced separation, through a lasting Power of Attorney, of the complainant and someone he regards as his partner. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome that the complainant wants.

  • Suffolk County Council (16 003 992)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 24-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms A's complaints about the Care Provider's response to her concerns about her late father, Mr B's end of life care. This is because he could not add to the Care Provider's response or provide Ms A with a different outcome if he investigated.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (16 016 470)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 24-Mar-2017

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's late complaint about the Council's involvement with her father (Mr Y) in 2015. Ms X has not made this complaint within the normal 12 month period and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate the complaint now.

  • Leeds City Council (16 008 975)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 23-Mar-2017

    Summary: There was fault in the way the Council carried out a safeguarding investigation into allegations Mr P's son had suffered physical abuse. These were identified by an independent investigation commissioned by the Council which has investigated the issues Mr P is complaining about to the Ombudsman. The Council has already accepted the findings of the independent investigation and offered to pay Mr P £1,000 to remedy any injustice caused by its actions. There was no fault in the way the Council carried out Mr P's son's care review.

  • Southend-on-Sea Borough Council (16 005 174)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 20-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found fault in the way a Practice responded to requests for a home visit. It did not refer the requests to a GP and this caused avoidable uncertainty and stress. There was fault in a subsequent safeguarding investigation as it did not seek the views of the alleged perpetrator. This caused a delay in Mr C finding out the answers he was seeking. The Ombudsmen also found fault by NHS England for misinforming Mr C and causing further delays. The Ombudsmen has recommended these organisations apologise to Mr C and provide payments as a tangible acknowledgement of the injustice Mr C experienced.

  • Bath and North East Somerset Council (16 007 850)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 20-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault in the way it conducted a safeguarding investigation. The Council has agreed to a remedy to acknowledge the impact of this fault.

  • East Sussex County Council (16 016 884)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 17-Mar-2017

    Summary: the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council's social services department. This is because the complainant does not have consent from the person affected for a complaint to be made or his data to be shared.

  • Blackburn with Darwen Council (15 020 170)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 17-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault for not adequately assessing the complainant's uncle after a relative reported concern for his welfare in 2014. In particular it did not adequately assess his capacity to self-care and understand risks associated with his behaviour. It also failed to arrange a package of care when he later moved to sheltered accommodation, despite assessing a need for such care. When the Council provided a care package there were some further failings by the care provider. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused by these faults. It will apologise to the complainant, make payments to her and her uncle totalling £1550 and write confirming what changes it has made to its practices to demonstrate it has learnt from the complaint.

;