Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care planning because it is unlikely that investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council did not do all it could and should to support the family at a time of carer crisis, and to support the wellbeing of a vulnerable adult. Ms B and the family feel let down and have lost faith in the Council. Ms B wants the Council to supervise the officer involved to prevent others experiencing similar problems.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

3. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2), as amended)

4. Mr C has died, we have decided Ms B is a suitable representative. We cannot provide any remedy to Mr C.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms B and her family contacted the Council to help with the care support of her father in law (Mr C) at a time of carer crisis. The family placed Mr C in a residential care home as a temporary placement. The Council was involved to complete relevant assessments to consider Mr C’s needs and how best to meet them in the longer term. Mr C has since died.
8. There has been some confusion over who would pay for one-to-one care support for Mr C within the residential care home. The Council accepts it did not make clear that it would not be funding this support. The contract for care was a private matter between Mr C and the care provider, any changes to care support and associated increase of fees should have been amended in that contract. Ms B has made a direct complaint to the care provider. The Council has confirmed it will provide training to the officer on finance regulations.
9. The Council has confirmed it did not provide Mr C, or a family member on his behalf, with a copy of the care needs assessment it completed. This was fault and the Council has apologised.
10. The Council has explained the reasons why there was delay in completing relevant assessments. The Council has also explained why it is not responsible for Ms B’s other concerns, and that those concerns should be directed to the care provider.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. The family are seeking supervision of the officer involved, the Ombudsman cannot get involved in personnel matters. The Council has identified a training need for the officer on financial regulations to prevent future problems and will take learning from this complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman