Safeguarding archive 2021-2022


Archive has 181 results

  • Reading Borough Council (19 006 531)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 27-Oct-2021

    Summary: Mrs B complains the Council did not ensure her father, Mr C, received an adequate level of support with his medications and care. She says he often missed medications, which contributed to incidents of confusion and incontinence. She says carers falsely signed medication records. The Ombudsman finds fault in the care provided, in a lack of oversight and assessment of Mr C’s care needs, and the lack of investigation into allegations around medication recording.

  • Cambridgeshire County Council (20 009 870)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 26-Oct-2021

    Summary: the Council delayed in reporting the findings of its safeguarding investigation to Mr X, and took too long to complete the investigation of his complaint. The Council has already offered a proportionate remedy to Mr X in respect of those delays. There is no evidence the safeguarding investigation itself was flawed. Any injustice to Mr X has already been remedied by the offer from the Council.

  • Buckinghamshire Council (20 007 640)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 24-Oct-2021

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council wrongly initiated safeguarding proceedings against her and removed her from the home she was living in with her friend Ms Y. She said the Council’s actions left her homeless and caused her distress. There was no fault in the Council’s actions.

  • London Borough of Harrow (21 001 940)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 21-Oct-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to investigate his concerns about the care received by his daughter, Ms Y and to share her social care records with him. We are discontinuing our investigation because the Information Commissioner is best placed to deal with Mr X’s wish to see Ms Y’s records. In addition, the Council’s offer to engage with Ms Y’s family to discuss their concerns about her care is a reasonable one for Mr X to pursue first to try and resolve the matter.

  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (21 002 407)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 21-Oct-2021

    Summary: We found fault with the Council for failing to conduct the independent investigation it committed to. This denied Mr B the opportunity to have his complaint considered independently from the Council. The Council agreed to appoint an independent investigator.

  • Worcestershire County Council (21 001 299)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 20-Oct-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained about the outcome of the Council’s safeguarding investigation into his father, Mr F’s fall at Bluebrooke Nursing home (the care provider) which left him permanently disabled. We have discontinued this investigation. This is because Mr X has instructed solicitors to pursue legal action against the care provider which will consider matters raised in his complaint.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (21 007 186)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 20-Oct-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s late complaint about the Council’s actions in 2018. This is because Mr C could have come to us before now if he was concerned his stepfather, Mr D was living in unsuitable accommodation.

  • London Borough of Havering (21 007 481)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 19-Oct-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response after the complainant reported that his sister, a Council employee, is subjecting him to domestic abuse. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Torbay Council (21 007 974)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 19-Oct-2021

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about evidence the Council provided to the Court of Protection. This is because the law does not allow us to investigate what happened in court.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (21 006 295)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 18-Oct-2021

    Summary: Mrs B complained about the actions of the Council in respect of her late uncle, Mr C following a safeguarding investigation which led to him being moved into respite care where he died shortly afterwards. Mrs B says the Council’s actions were wrong and damaging. The whole family has been caused significant distress and do not understand why the Council took the action that it did. We cannot find fault with the actions the Council took.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings