Adult care services archive 2021-2022


Archive has 1761 results

  • Kent County Council (21 006 335)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr D complained the Council’s Social Worker communicated poorly with him and failed to progress his housing application. As a result, he said he experienced distress and uncertainty. We found no fault in how the Council handled Mr D’s care support, nor his application for supported accommodation. It reached decisions it was entitled to make, so we cannot criticise the merits of its decisions.

  • Leeds City Council (21 010 306)

    Statement Not upheld Other 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s actions in passing on information from her daughter’s father, and some comments it made to him. She said these resulted in an inappropriate safeguarding referral and court action which caused her to spend a lot of time in court defending herself. We find the Council was not at fault.

  • Devon County Council (21 011 227)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's handling of allegations about his care for his partner and its decision that his partner should receive care in a nursing home. I have ended my investigation because most of the issues Mr X complained about occurred too long ago. There was also insufficient evidence of fault, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

  • London Borough of Enfield (21 012 554)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will discontinue our investigation into Ms A’s complaint. The Office of the Public Guardian is currently investigating concerns about Ms A acting as her daughter’s lasting power of attorney. We cannot say Ms A is a suitable representative for her daughter.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (21 016 891)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s safeguarding investigation into the care of Mrs X’s husband in a care home. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant this. Mrs X is welcome to return to us about matters at the care home that were not safeguarding issues if she has first completed the care home’s complaints procedure.

  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (21 017 481)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions in relation to top-up payments. That is because the complaint is late.

  • Somerset County Council (20 008 735)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs M complained on behalf of her son, Mr P, about the actions of Somerset County Council (the Council) and Somerset NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). The complaint was about the Council’s adult care services and the Trust’s mental health and complaints services. We have upheld elements of the complaint relating to social care needs assessment, claims about Mrs M’s behaviour, and complaint handling. We have not upheld other parts of the complaint. The Council and Trust accept our recommendations. We have therefore completed our investigation.

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (20 008 910)

    Statement Upheld Covid-19 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs D complained about the way the Trust cared for her father, Mr F, when he attended its emergency department and during two hospital admissions. She also complained about the way the Council and Trust dealt with her father’s discharge from hospital to a care home. We have found fault in the Council’s and Trust’s record keeping and in the way the Trust managed Mr F’s continence care. The Council and Trust accept our recommendations, so we have completed our investigation.

  • Wiltshire Council (21 002 690)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: Ms M complains, on behalf of three young adults, the Council gave them misleading advice about applying for social housing. The Council was at fault as it failed to manage their expectations about the likely success of their application given restrictions imposed by local housing providers. It failed to proactively address why they were not being considered for properties and to ensure they understood this. The Council has agreed to make a payment to remedy the distress and frustration this caused them. It has also agreed to review its procedures to be clearer about the likely success of applications from unrelated adults.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (20 011 638)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 23-Mar-2022

    Summary: We have not found fault in the way the Approved Mental Health Professional carried out an assessment of Mr C to decide whether to make an application to detain him in hospital.

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