Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council investigated safeguarding concerns and meets care and support needs. The Ombudsman cannot question or criticise the Council’s decisions where there is no fault in how they were made. If the complainant disagrees with what is in the best interests of the person receiving care they can ask the Court of Protection to decide.

The complaint

1. Mr C says the Council has not properly investigated his safeguarding concerns about his relative Mr D. Mr C says the Council is allowing coercive control to continue and is not properly supporting Mr D to live independently and promote his personal development. Mr C says the Council excludes him from reviews, which is causing him distress and frustration. Mr C feels powerless and anxious for Mr D’s safety. Mr C wants the Council to have a consistent social worker with regular oversight, to include him in reviews, a review of Mr D’s capacity, living arrangements and financial management.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not 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
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council is responsible to meet Mr D’s adult social care needs. It is also responsible as the local safeguarding authority to protect him from abuse or neglect, and ensure he lives in safety and dignity.
7. Mr D lives with parent X. The Council has received safeguarding concerns that parent X is controlling and is preventing access with parent Y. Mr C’s view is that Mr D would be better living in supported living.
8. The Council fully investigated the safeguarding concerns. Mr D had an advocate to engage his views. The Council included parents X and Y, other relatives and relevant professionals. The Council had an action plan, which then moved onto considering some issues such as where Mr D should live at his annual care reviews. The Council was satisfied Mr D visits parent Y without parent X present. Mr D also spends time away from parent X with the support of care workers.
9. The care and support statutory guidance says an assessment must be person-centred, involving the individual and any carer the adult has, or any other person they might want involved. The care reviews include parents X and Y, and care professionals who know Mr D well. The Council does not wish to overwhelm Mr D by having too many people involved and has involved the key people. Although Mr C believes he should also be involved, I find no fault in how the Council reached its decision. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. We cannot challenge the Council’s decision unless there is fault in its decision making.
10. Parent X has applied to be court appointed deputy for Mr D’s finances. This will provide more control and oversight. If Mr C has concerns, he needs to raise these with the Court of Protection, this is a matter outside the control of the Council.
11. The Court of Protection makes financial and welfare decisions for people who cannot make those decisions themselves because of a lack of mental capacity. If Mr C wishes to challenge decisions about Mr D’s welfare, such as where he should live, he could ask the Court of Protection to decide this.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault. The Council has properly investigated safeguarding concerns and is meeting Mr D’s adult social care needs. If Mr C wishes to challenge what is in Mr D’s best interests, he can ask the Court of Protection to decide this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman