Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care support at home. It is unlikely we would add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms F says the Council failed in the care support it provided to her relative, Mr G. Ms F says despite her contacts to the Council to raise concerns, the Council made no changes to Mr G’s care support; Mr G’s health declined, and he died. Ms F found it stressful. Ms F wants the Council to acknowledge its failings and not let this happen to another family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• any fault has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
7. It was upsetting for Mr G’s family to see his decline in health, and his death. Only a coroner can decide whether any failings in care caused or contributed to Mr G’s death.
8. Ms F did what she could to support Mr G and regularly contacted the Council to raise concerns about Mr G’s care support. The Council accepts it should have completed a reassessment of Mr G’s care support. However, we cannot say this failure caused a significant injustice that would justify an investigation. It is possible the care package would have remained the same. Any significant injustice caused by any failures in care would be to Mr G, who we can provide no remedy to.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms F’s complaint because it is unlikely we would add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome. Although the situation was upsetting and stressful for Ms F, we would not investigate solely on that basis. We can provide no remedy to Mr G, so there is no significantly worthwhile outcome achievable to justify our resource to investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman