Summary: Mr X complained about the care provided by care agencies and the Council putting in an interim care package without telling him about it. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely an investigation by us will lead to a different result.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the care provided by care agencies and the Council providing an interim care package without telling him who was coming and when. Mr X said he had struggled with personal care.

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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the information put in by Mr X with his complaint. I have also considered the Council's response.
4. Mr X had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman he needed personal care but the carers provided by the Council were incapable and never turned up on time.
6. Mr X said when he complained to the Council it offered direct payments. He said the Council told him meanwhile it would set up another care package.
7. Mr X complained the Council did not tell him who was coming or when. He said he suddenly had a stranger turn up at his door at inconvenient times.
8. Mr X says he complained as he did not want the interim service, and had not given his permission for it. He says because he complained about this it has ‘snowballed out of control’ and he has received no help. He says on one occasion he suffered a head injury because he was trying to do things on his own.
9. The Council told me it apologized to Mr X for the carers arriving unannounced. It said it arranged the package at short notice, but it failed to let Mr X know. The Council said it generally set up ‘bridging’ packages while it arranged direct payments. The Council explained normally the care agency contacted clients before visiting.
10. The Council told me it had assigned several care agencies to Mr X at his request. It said Mr X had given notice to at least four with immediate effect, which then left him without support.
11. The Council explained it had suggested direct payments because they might resolve Mr X’s concerns with the care agencies it assigned. He could choose how to get the support he wanted.
12. The Council told me it had assigned an assessor to visit Mr X to discuss the direct payment scheme. It said Mr X cancelled an arranged visit, and would not accept the Council’s offer to rearrange.
13. The Council explained it had left Mr X the choice to contact it to arrange a home visit. It said when Mr X failed to do so it closed the referral.
14. The Council said Mr X could contact it to look at re-establishing a care package, or setting up a direct payment arrangement.

Analysis

15. From the evidence I have seen the Council’s complaint response deals properly with the matters Mr X raised in his complaint. I cannot find fault with the Council when Mr X has refused to engage with it.
16. If Mr X wants to arrange direct payments he must allow the Council to assess him for this service. If he wants to re-establish a care package he must contact the Council.
17. If Mr X wishes to complain about care agency staff he should first complain to the agency, to allow it to respond to his concerns. If he remains unhappy he can then complain to the Council.
18. We cannot add to the Council’s investigation and it is unlikely an investigation by us would have a different result.

Back to top

Final decision

19. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the Ombudsman considers the Council has provided Mr X with a satisfactory response to his complaint. It is unlikely further investigation by us will lead to a different result.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman