Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to make his mother’s residential care placement permanent because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wants to make his mother’s residential care placement permanent or arrange for her to return home with a care package. He says that his mother, Mrs Y, only has a temporary need for residential care and the Council should support this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs Y moved to a temporary residential care placement from hospital while healing from a bed sore. The Council agreed to wait to complete a Care Act assessment so it could better assess Mrs Y’s long-term needs.
7. The Council completed a Care Act assessment when Mrs Y had been in the residential care placement for 11 months. Mr X was present at the assessment to support Mrs Y. The assessment was informed by the professional judgment of a medical professional that Mrs Y would continue to have long term care needs and that this was unlikely to change. The Council extended the temporary residential care placement for 6 weeks to give Mrs Y time to consider her options; to return home with a care package or to remain in a care home on a permanent basis.
8. Mr X says his mother wants to return home but needs more time for the sore to heal before this can happen safely. The Council has offered a further meeting with Mrs Y and Mr X to discuss the options. This demonstrates the Council is supporting Mrs Y to make an informed decision about her future care arrangements.
9. An investigation is not justified as there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision. It is also clear the Council has given Mrs Y an appropriate amount of time to consider her options on how her long-term care needs will be met.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision to make Mrs Y’s residential care placement permanent.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman