Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about planning how to meet adult social care needs. It is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault in the Council not involving the family, or a significant injustice as we could not say the outcome would be different. We cannot say the Council’s actions caused a decline in health. The Council has apologised for communication failures, and it is unlikely we would achieve anything further.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council discussed and agreed hospital discharge with her relative, Mr C, without family present despite their request otherwise. Mr C went to an intermediate care centre where he fell and broke his hip shortly after arriving. Ms B says Mr C’s health has declined since which has been distressing for Mr C’s family. Ms B would like the Council to include relevant family in assessments and decision making, be polite, and care about the people they are dealing with. Ms B found the Council’s complaint response rude and dismissive.

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; or
• 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.

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

3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

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. It is unlikely we will find enough evidence of fault in the Council’s assessment of Mr C’s care and support needs, and the decisions around where he should go from hospital. The Council deemed Mr C to have capacity to decide about his care and so did not have to include Mr C’s family. Its notes say Mr C said he would tell his family, and the Council says the hospital did not pass on Ms B’s request to be present at any assessment or discussions. It appears Mr C was happy to go ahead with the assessment and did not ask for anyone else to be there. Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 the Council must assume Mr C has capacity to make his own decisions unless there are good reasons to think otherwise. So although this was frustrating and upsetting for Ms B, it is unlikely we will find it was caused by Council fault.
7. The Council accepts it failed to return Ms B’s telephone call and so it missed an opportunity to discuss any issues before Mr C left hospital. However, we cannot say the outcome would be any different had the Council had a telephone call with Ms B. The Council had carried out an assessment of Mr C’s care and support needs and how best to meet them. The Council has apologised to Ms B for its fault and the missed opportunity; it is unlikely we would achieve anything further.
8. Falls cannot always be prevented. Mr C was in his room alone when he fell. Fall sensors were in place as required. We cannot say Mr C’s decline in health was solely caused by any fault of the Council.
9. Ms B is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because the Council’s fault has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement. The Council has apologised for failures in communication, and it is unlikely we would add anything further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman