Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure by the Council to meet social care needs or appropriately safeguard the complainant from the risk of harm. This is because we are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s handling of these matters.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mrs X) complains about an alleged lack of Council support with respect to meeting her adult social care needs and safeguarding her from harm. In particular, she says the Council has failed to carry out alterations to her home and has refused her access to a social worker.
2. In addition, Mrs X also complains about an inadequate Council led safeguarding inquiry which related to concerns she may be at risk of harm. She says a lack of robust action by the Council exposed her to further harm. Mrs X also says she has been unfairly treated by making complaints to the Council and that it has restricted her ability to contact it regarding issues she regards as unresolved.
3. In summary, Mrs X says the alleged fault has meant she has not received the support she is entitled to and which is needed to meet her health and care needs. She also says the Council allowed her to suffer harm by a failure to take appropriate action. She wants the Council to be held accountable for its failings and to provide the support she feels she is entitled to receive.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or

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

5. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how a council 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

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council arranged for an Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment for Mrs X in March 2021 which led to a report with recommendations for home alterations. Though Mrs X says the Council has failed to implement the recommendations, the Council explains this has not been possible due to her not engaging with the process by accepting appointments. I have read correspondence between the Council and Mrs X and note multiple dates for appointments have been offered to her, though these have not been responded to. The Council therefore closed the case, though invited Mrs X again in January 2024 to contact the relevant Council officer to arrange an assessment if she wished to progress the matter. Assessments by an OT are necessary to ensure any home alterations are necessary and proportionate to meeting Mrs X’s needs. The available evidence shows the Council has sought to facilitate this and so I am unlikely to find fault.
8. In addition, the evidence shows the Council has offered Mrs X a social worker in both July 2023 and January 2024. Mrs X has not engaged with the Council’s invitation and it has therefore closed the case. The Council has however, in its final complaint response to Mrs X, asked if she wishes to proceed with this. I am unlikely therefore to find fault in respect of Mrs X’s claim the Council has refused her access to support from a social worker.
9. In respect of safeguarding, the Council received a number of referrals concerning a volatile relationship between the complainant and one of her daughters. In each referral, the adult alleged to be at risk is Mrs X. In response, the Council undertook enquiries in accordance with its safeguarding duties under the Care Act 2014. The Council says the conclusion of the enquiries were that a proportionate response to the referrals was appropriate. This response ranged from referrals to the police and adult social care, care services, the provision of victim support and mental health services advice. The evidence shows the Council has conducted an appropriate safeguarding assessment in accordance with its obligations and taken action it considers proportionate to safeguard Mrs X from the risk of harm. I have not found evidence of fault and it is not my role to question a properly made decision by the Council.
10. Separately, Mrs X says the Council has wrongly restricted her communications with it. In response, the Council says Mrs X’s contacts have been unacceptable in terms of volume and due to her continuing to write about issues it has already responded to. I have read the Council’s responses to Mrs X on these issues and note it is only restricting Mrs X’s contacts by asking she communicate through a specific point of contact. She is therefore still able to contact the Council to access services and raise new issues. We will not investigate this matter as there is insufficient evidence the Council’s approach to communicating with Mrs X has caused her a significant injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council with respect to meeting Mrs X’s needs or its approach to safeguarding. Further, there is insufficient evidence the Council’s approach to communicating with Mrs X has caused her a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman