Summary: I will not investigate this complaint about the circumstances in which a Care Provider ceased care for the complainant’s father. This is because we cannot achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs N, says that the Care Provider:
• Failed to provide a lunchtime call to her father, F;
• Terminated his care provision without notice; and
• Failed to provide satisfactory responses to the questions raised in her complaint to the Care Provider.

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 could add to any previous investigation by the Care Provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by Mrs N and by the Council. I have also sent Mrs N a draft decision for her comments.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs N’s father, F, received domiciliary care from the Care Provider in the form of three daily visits.
5. On one occasion, he did not receive a lunchtime call, and Mrs N complained to the Care Provider. Following the communications between Mrs N and the Care Provider, F’s care was terminated from the next day. The Council sourced a new provider for F.
6. Mrs N complained to the Care Provider about the missed call and about the immediate termination of the call. She raised many questions about what had happened.
7. The Care Provider stated that the carer had come to the house, but that the blinds were down, the door was locked, the car was gone and F did not answer the door. The carer had therefore waited a few minutes and then left. It said that she did not use the key safe, as the carers had been told not to do so.
8. The Care Provider further said that when the care contract was accepted, concerns were raised about abuse of the carers, and the contract specified that any abuse would lead to immediate termination of the care. The family’s key worker was aware of this. The Care Provider said that Mrs N had been abusive over the missed call, and had threatened action which the Provider regarded as harassment of the care staff. The care was therefore withdrawn, although a carer did attend on the next morning to ensure that F was provided with meals for that day.
9. Mrs N is dissatisfied with the response. She does not accept that a carer came to the house and found F absent. She continues to dispute the Provider’s right to withdraw care in the way that it did, and she says that her questions did not received adequate responses.
10. I have looked carefully at the information provided, and I do not propose to investigate the complaint, as I do not see any prospect of adding anything to the Care Provider’s investigation and response.
11. There is no definite evidence that could resolve the different versions of what happened regarding the missed call, and we have no means to make an evidenced decision on the matter.
12. In addition, there is nothing that we can add to the Care Provider’s reasons for terminating the care.
13. Finally, although Mrs N says she has not had adequate responses to her questions, the Care Provider did answer them. Mrs N may not be satisfied or agree with what it said, but further investigation but the LGSCO would not provide different answers or achieve anything further.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because I could not add anything to the Care Provider’s previous investigation and response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman