Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the actions of the Council. This is because further investigation would not provide a different outcome to that Mr B has received from the Council or give him the outcome he wants.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained to the Council about the attitude of council staff when his mother, Mrs C was discharged from a period of reablement. Mr B says he did not know a package of care had been set up for Mrs C and was threatened in a telephone call, that if she refused to accept it, the Council would remove her package of care. Mr B says he later spoke to a senior practitioner and said he wanted to complain, but his complaint was not escalated. Mr B wants a formal apology, the care worker removed from anything to do with social care, the Council to check whether the care provider can provide proper services and stop using Covid-19 as an excuse for appalling behaviour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information and documentation provided by Mr B and the Council. I sent Mr B a copy of my draft decision and disucssed his comments on it with him.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B complained about the attitude of staff and threat of removal of Mrs C’s care package.
6. The Council says its electronic case notes show the care worker contacted Mr B and Mrs C and advised the care provider could provide a care package to meet Mrs C’s assessed care needs. The Council’s response to Mr B’s complaint said:

I can see Mrs [C] has had previous agencies involved and they have given notice. This severely restricts the number of agencies that can provide the care.

The care was also requested at a time when care providers were struggling to support citizens in the community due to the Coronavirus pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, there was already a national shortage of carers and it is not always possible to provide the care in a timely way. The pandemic has made this more difficult as some care staff were needing to stay at home and were unable to work due to their own illness or shielding requirements. This meant that [the care worker] did not have any alternative to the care provider that was identified at this time. She was not intentionally rude but was trying to be clear about her reasons why there was no alternative provider.

The only other option available was for Mrs [C] to consider Direct Payments. This would mean Mrs [C] would receive money directly and could arrange her own care with any agency whether on the council list of approved providers or not. I can see that [the care worker] did discuss this with you and did make a referral on behalf of Mrs [C] to the brokerage team, but you chose not to proceed with this process stating that you preferred to have a commissioned service. I also noted that Mrs [C] did previously have a Direct Payment and a decision was made for this to stop.

[The care worker] had no intention of wanting Mrs [C] to feel guilty about needing care nor did she feel she did not speak nicely to her, however, clearly this was how Mrs [C] felt and for this, I apologise. [the care worker’s] intention was to be clear that at that time there was no alternative care available for Mrs [C] and if the care provider was not accepted, there was no alternative provider available. [The care worker] was very aware that this would be become more difficult as the pandemic worsened and she did not wish for Mrs [C] to be without the care she needed.

Mr B later spoke to a senior practitioner for the Integrated Enablement Team about the conversation that had taken place. [The senior practitioner] has recorded the conversation within the electronic case notes. She has clearly stated she was phoning to speak to Mrs [C] about her being upset following the conversation she had had with [the case worker]. You told [the senior practitioner] this was not possible as Mrs [C] was now asleep. [The senior practitioner] went onto to explain that the agency was able to provide the care and support Mrs [C] required and that they were an accredited provider, and there was no doubt about their ability to provide the care required.

[The senior practitioner] also noted she advised you of the current situation with care providers, due to the corona virus pandemic, and that there was no other agency available to provide the support at this difficult time. The call ended with an agreement that the care would commence on the 30th March 2020.

Within the call, you stated to [the senior practitioner] that you intended to make a formal complaint. It is not noted that you expected [the senior practitioner] to progress a complaint for you to the complaints team, as she understood you were only informing her of your intention. I can only apologise if there was a misunderstanding at this point.

7. We could not add to this even if we investigated. We were not present during the call and could not say the case worker’s attitude was threatening. The Council has explained the reasons why the care worker said this was the only care provider available and has apologised that Mr B and Mrs B felt threatened. We are satisfied an apology remedies the injustice caused.
8. We cannot remove workers from their role as Mr B wants as this is a personnel matter and not one we can comment on.
9. The Council confirmed the care package arranged with the care provider meets Mrs C’s needs and has explained its situation during this time. We could not say this is fault.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because further investigation would not provide a different outcome to that Mr B has received from the Council or give him the outcome he wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman