Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a care provider making false accusations about Mr X regarding inappropriate behaviour towards female care staff. This is because further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the care provider made false accusations about him regarding inappropriate behaviour towards female care staff. He says this led to him receiving no care on some days as he was not allowed to have female staff support him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 with an investigation if we decide:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X receives 18 hours a week of domiciliary care, funded by the Council.
6. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint that the care provider had made false accusations about him regarding inappropriate behaviour towards female care staff. The Council noted there were care notes, staff statements, and incident reports that detailed the incidents and allegations against Mr X.
7. Therefore, as there are clear records the female carers who supported Mr X made allegations about his behaviour, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
8. The Council accepted Mr X did not always received all his assessed care and support hours. This was due to the care provider deciding Mr X should only receive care from male carers due to the allegations raised, and the care provider did not have enough male carers. The care provider said Mr X had refused to accept agency staff and so they could not commission agency staff to support Mr X.
9. Therefore, further investigation will not lead to a different outcome as it is unlikely we would recommend any further remedy. This is because when looking at remedying injustice caused by faults identified, we will consider whether the actions of the complainant contributed to any injustice. In this case, Mr X’s decision to decline agency workers meant the care provider was unable to provide all his care hours.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the alleged injustice is not significant enough to justify further investigation and because further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman