Adult care services archive 2016-2017


Archive has 1584 results

  • Warwickshire County Council (16 014 990)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: the Ombudsmen will not investigate Mrs F's complaints about the care provided to her late husband at Royal Leamington Spa Nursing Home. So much time has passed since the events complained about we are unlikely to be able to add to the investigation already carried out. We are also unlikely to be able to achieve the outcome Mrs F seeks.

  • London Borough of Bromley (16 007 971)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council properly assessed and reviewed an elderly person's care needs and sought to provide suitable care and support, which was not accepted by the family. It carried out a financial assessment correctly and supported the elderly person's care throughout the assessment.

  • Surrey County Council (16 014 583)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman exercised discretion to discontinue the investigation of Mr B's complaint against the Council that it failed to consider his request for residential care properly, failed to provide what is set out in the support plan, and failed to provide enough help at night and with housework. This is because Mr B wants to withdraw his complaint.

  • Salford City Council (16 017 110)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A's complaint about care given to her mother Mrs B, at the end of her life. This is because it is unlikely he could add to the Care Providers response or provide a different outcome even if he investigated.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (16 011 972)

    Statement Upheld Charging 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault when the Care Provider it arranged charged Mrs X £25 per week top up. The Council offered Mrs X an alternative when it found out but she declined. It will refund £300 to Mrs X for the 12 weeks she paid the top up before this.

  • 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.

  • Lancashire County Council (16 016 636)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not consider further Mr X's complaint that the Council refused his daughter a blue badge. There is no fault.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (15 004 581)

    Statement Not upheld Other 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found no fault in the care, support and treatment provided to the complainant's late father by the Trust, the Surgery, the Council and the Hospice. The care, support and treatment provided was in line with good medical practice and national guidance. NHS England took too long to respond to a complaint but it already apologised to the complainant for the delay.

  • London Borough of Hackney (16 009 756)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: The Council was not at fault in the way it dealt with Mr Y's assessment but it was at fault when it delayed finalising the assessment and offering support for over five months. It will apologise and offer a new assessment.

  • Shropshire Council (16 009 718)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 31-Mar-2017

    Summary: There is some evidence of fault in arrangements made by the Council for a capacity assessment to be carried out in the home of the complainant but this did not cause injustice to her. The Council has agreed to apologise and review its procedures in this area.

;