Summary: We have decided not to investigate Mrs X’s complaint about adult social care services for her father, Mr Y. This is because the Council has upheld the complaint and agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about an adult social care needs assessment and care provided to her father, Mr Y, and about failings in the complaints handling process. The family suffered distress and uncertainty, and Mrs X was put to avoidable time and trouble pursuing the Council. Mrs X wanted the Council to refund care fees of £1031.32 to remedy the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X complained about an adult social care needs assessment and care provided to her father, Mr Y, and about failings in the complaints handling process. The family suffered distress and uncertainty, and Mrs X was put to avoidable time and trouble pursuing the Council.
6. If we investigated the complaint, it is likely we would find fault because the Council has already accepted fault causing injustice in relation to the following:
• the social worker did not properly engage with family members when carrying out needs assessment prior to Mr Y’s discharge from hospital in Spring 2023. This caused the family distress and casts doubt on the accuracy of the assessment, since it was based in Mr Y’s own account of what he could and could not do and did not take into account the view of his primary carer.
• there were errors in the financial assessment, which have since been corrected and did not cause Mr Y to pay more care costs than he should have, although Mrs X was put to avoidable time and trouble pursuing the matter.
• There was no record to show the care provider noticed a large bruise on Mr Y’s arm in April 2023 and no record they saw an ulcer on his buttock in May 2023. A health professional raised safeguarding concerns in May 2023 and, as part of safeguarding enquiries, it was accepted the care provider had not follow good practice to complete a body map and detail action taken to address these issues. The Council accepted the care, which it had commissioned, fell below the expected standard and this caused distress to the family.
• No care provided during the weekend 29 & 30 July due to mis-communication by Council staff. As a result, Mr Y was left without food and drink, and medication. During the weekend he fell and was left on the floor for up to two days. This caused the family considerable distress, and they believe led to a noticeable deterioration in his health.
• There was a failure to complete a CHC checklist. Although we cannot say whether Mr Y would have been eligible for NHS CHC funding, the family is left with uncertainty about this, which is an injustice.
7. In addition, there were delays in responding to the complaint, and a poor investigation initially, which meant not all the issues were responded to, and complaint responses were inaccurate in some respects. As a result, Mrs X was put to avoidable time and trouble pursuing the Council for a full response to her concerns.
8. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused to Mrs X and the family by waiving the outstanding care costs as Mrs X had suggested to resolve the complaint early. This sum is in line with our Guidance on remedies, available on our website, although we would usually recommend payments to those affected as opposed to waiving fees. The Council agreed to do this within one month of the date of my final decision.
9. For completeness, Mr Y has since died so we cannot remedy any injustice to him. And the Council has taken appropriate steps to prevent recurrence of the failings in this case.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We have upheld this complaint because Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs X and improving its service for others.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman