Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. There is no worthwhile outcome from an Ombudsman investigation as the court of protection has decided the care and living arrangements. Any failures in communication do not cause a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council put pressure on her for her relative, Mr C to move out of her home. Ms B does not think Mr C should have moved. Ms B also questions the medication prescribed to Mr C. Ms B says she is depressed.

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 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 another body better placed to consider this complaint, 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council decided under the best interest process of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 where Mr C should live. The Council included Ms B in that process and considered her views. Ms B disputed the decision, so the Council took the case to the Court of Protection. Ms B says she did not know about this until she got a file of court papers through the door. This is not a significant enough injustice to justify an investigation.
6. The court has decided where Mr C should live and the care he should receive. The Ombudsman can not change that or achieve a different outcome. Ms B would need to go back to court to challenge the decision of where Mr C should live.
7. Ms B queries Mr C’s medication. The Council has correctly told Ms B this is decided by the health professionals involved in Mr C’s care, so Ms B would need to raise this concern with them. The Ombudsman has no powers to consider NHS matters, that would be for the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not a significant enough injustice caused by any poor communication to justify our involvement. There is no worthwhile outcome the Ombudsman can achieve as we cannot change the court decision about where Mr C should live.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman