City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (19 009 985)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 11-Aug-2020

Summary: The Council failed to respond properly to Mrs X’s complaints about the way a social worker conducted a safeguarding investigation. It failed to follow its safeguarding procedure or the Mental Capacity Act. It has apologised and partially upheld her complaint but agrees to recognise the considerable distress caused by a consolatory payment. It will also review its processes for signing off safeguarding investigations.

Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (20 001 271)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 04-Aug-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s safeguarding investigation into the care provided to her late mother, Mrs C. This is because any further investigation could not provide Mrs B with a different outcome to that she has been given or of the kind she wants.

London Borough of Barnet (20 001 309)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 04-Aug-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s late complaint about the Council’s decision not to investigate her concerns under its responsibility for safeguarding vulnerable adults, the time it took to consider her complaints and way it considered them. This is because it is unlikely he would find fault with the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint as a safeguarding matter. It is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to the Council’s responses and Ms B could have come to the Ombudsman in 2018 if she was concerned with the Council’s decision not to investigate her safeguarding concerns. Where he is not investigating the substantive matter, he will not normally consider how the Council handled the complaint. That is the case here.

Essex County Council (19 014 527)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 04-Aug-2020

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council dealt with safeguarding concerns and his complaints about his family’s care. He says this caused much stress and frustration to them all. The Ombudsman finds the Council did not deal adequately with the safeguarding concerns and Mr X’s complaints. He recommended it pays Mr X £350 and takes action to ensure it deals with safeguarding and complaints adequately in future. It has agreed to do this.

East Sussex County Council (19 014 173)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 30-Jul-2020

Summary: The Ombudsmen find a CCG did not do enough to pursue alternative ways of arranging Continuing Healthcare outside of directly commissioning it. As a result Ms A had to provide a significant amount of care for her mother which, in turn, caused avoidable stress and discomfort. The Ombudsmen also find a Council did not handle the removal of a source of support to Ms A as sensitively as it should. The Ombudsmen has recommended apologies and a financial payment to address these injustices.

Bristol City Council (19 013 945)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 24-Jul-2020

Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his father, Mr Y, about a safeguarding enquiry carried out by the Council. The Ombudsman found there was some fault in the Council’s initial safeguarding enquiry and record keeping. There was no fault in the outcome of the enquiry.

Hertfordshire County Council (19 018 315)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 22-Jul-2020

Summary: Ms X complains the Council did not facilitate her, or her mother’s, contact with her aunt. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint further as the Council has agreed to make an application to the Court of Protection providing contact is still in the best interests of Ms X’s aunt.

Blackpool Borough Council (20 000 191)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 21-Jul-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s role in safeguarding of her mother in 2018. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, and there is no good reason to investigate the complaint so long after the original events and where much of the evidence has already been considered in court.

London Borough of Hackney (19 014 823)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 17-Jul-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s response to his living conditions. This is because: we cannot investigate the Council’s social housing function; and there is not enough evidence the Council has failed to consider and act on its social care functions, so the Ombudsman could not achieve anything worthwhile by investigating.

Coventry City Council (19 010 884)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 13-Jul-2020

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to involve her in a safeguarding enquiry concerning her relative Mr Y. The Council was at fault as it did not discuss the concerns with Ms X. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and review the way it conducted the investigation to identify any lessons to be learned. There was no fault in the actions the Council took as a result of the safeguarding investigation.