Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence to support the care worker was rude, so we cannot achieve the apology Mr B wants. The short notice to end the service has not caused a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr B says a care worker providing care to his cousin (Ms C) was rude to Ms C and said untrue things about Mr B and his wife. Mr B says the Care Provider failed to deal with his complaints about the matter. Mr B says after nine months without a resolution to the complaint the Care Provider then ended its service, only giving eight days’ notice. Mr B says because of this abrupt notice period Ms C went into respite care to meet her needs and has remained there since but is anxious to return home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. 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:

• the action has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms C received care at home from Castle Care Teesdale Limited (the Care Provider). Ms C’s local council gives her ‘direct payments’ so that she can employ a care provider to meet her needs. Therefore, the care package is a private arrangement between Ms C and the Care Provider.
6. Mr B claims during a care visit a care worker called Ms C a rude name, and said untrue things about he and his wife, which he finds hurtful and would like the Care Provider to apologise for. The Care Provider spoke with the care worker who denied the allegations. It is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to this investigation and reach a conclusion of fault where there is no evidence in support. So, we could not achieve the apology that Mr B wants.
7. Mr B says the Care Provider did not respond to his complaint, but I have seen evidence the Care Provider responded to correspondence from Mr B about his concerns. It advised the care worker would not provide support to Ms C, that it had reported the incident to the local council and there would be a review of Ms C’s care support.
8. There was a long gap in correspondence between the parties while Mr B got power of attorney for health and welfare, and then reignited the complaint. The Care Provider confirmed there was no evidence to support Mr B’s claims of slander and it felt removing the care worker from the team supporting Ms C was appropriate action in response to the complaint.
9. It might have helped if the Care Provider had immediately told Mr B the care worker had denied the allegations, but I have not seen this until the correspondence restarted.
10. The Care Provider then terminated its contract. There is no evidence to show the only reason it did so was because of the complaint; the Care Provider explains the reason was because it did not have the staff to provide the required care. This is an appropriate reason to end a care package.
11. The Care Provider says it did not have a contract with Ms C that specified a notice period, so it gave seven days as it did not have the staff to provide Ms C’s care for any longer than that. We would expect there to be clear terms and conditions of engagement in place. However, I cannot say the notice period of seven days caused any significant injustice to Ms C. This is because it is five months since the Care Provider ended its service and Ms C has not found an alternative provider to provide care at home. So even if the Care Provider had given a longer notice period Ms C’s situation would be the same. It is not the Care Provider’s actions that have caused the injustice of Ms C remaining in a residential care home.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence the Care Provider’s actions have caused significant injustice. It is unlikely we can add to the Care Provider’s investigation, reach a different outcome, or achieve the apology sought.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman