Archive has 1598 results
-
Royal Borough of Greenwich (19 018 045)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 30-Mar-2020
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council-funded care her brother received from a domiciliary care agency, and the Council’s subsequent delay in investigating the neglect he suffered. We will not consider this late complaint. While the Council’s investigation was responsible for some of the time it took before Mrs X complained, it would have been reasonable for her to complain to the Ombudsman sooner and it is unlikely we could now carry out a fair investigation.
-
London Borough of Bromley (19 018 544)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 30-Mar-2020
Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of his father, Mr Y, that the Council did not properly investigate safeguarding concerns about his father. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is a more suitable person to represent Mr Y.
-
City of Wolverhampton Council (19 008 005)
Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 30-Mar-2020
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to offer her a needs assessment following surgery and did not provide care or equipment she needed to stay independent. She said this caused her and her husband stress and inconvenience. There was no fault in the Council’s actions.
-
Statement Not upheld Charging 27-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman has discontinued its investigation into Mrs C’s complaint as there is an ongoing safeguarding enquiry into the same matter.
-
London Borough of Croydon (19 007 129)
Statement Not upheld Residential care 27-Mar-2020
Summary: There is no evidence of fault by the Council in this complaint. It followed the code of practice set out in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 before coming to a decision not to move Mr & Mrs Y from their care home.
-
Lancashire County Council (19 010 255)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 27-Mar-2020
Summary: There was fault in the way the Council carried out an initial financial assessment and then failed to respond to an email from the complainant. The Council has apologised for these faults which is an appropriate remedy. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council carried out a financial assessment in April 2019, but the Council should not have sent out a standard financial agreement to Mrs B as it did not apply to her situation. Mrs B has not suffered a significant injustice as a result of this.
-
Kent County Council (19 014 198)
Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 26-Mar-2020
Summary: There is no fault by the Council in how it investigated Mrs X’s complaint about the care provided to her late mother in a residential home. It carried a full and fair safeguarding investigation which reached evidence-based conclusions.
-
Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 016 860)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 26-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about care provided to his mother, Mrs C, by her care provider. This is because it is unlikely he could add to the care provider’s response or make a different finding even if he investigated. The care provider has apologised for its failings and implemented additional procedures. The Ombudsman is satisfied this remedies the injustice caused to Mrs C from the fault.
-
Buckinghamshire County Council (19 018 653)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 26-Mar-2020
Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about events from May to July 2018. The complaints are late and there are insufficient grounds to accept them now.
-
Staffordshire County Council (19 010 290)
Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 26-Mar-2020
Summary: There is no fault by the Council in the way it undertook a safeguarding investigation into concerns about how Mr X and his brother managed his late mother’s finances. It acted properly and in accordance with the law