Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a care provider giving notice to end Ms X’s mother’s care package and that the care provider shared information with third parties inappropriately. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, another body is better placed to consider her complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the care provider who delivered her mother’s care package tried to harass her mother out of her property by giving notice. She also complains the care provider shared information about them to third parties inappropriately to get her mother evicted.

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 start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(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. Ms X’s mother, Mrs A, holds an assured tenancy in an extra care housing scheme. Mrs A’s care package is delivered by a care provider.
6. Following Mrs A being discharged from hospital, the care provider gave notice on the care package they were providing to Mrs A. This did not affect Ms X’s assured tenancy.
7. Ms X was unhappy and felt the care provider was trying to harass her mother out of her property. In response to the complaint, the Council noted the care provider was entitled to give notice in line with the contract and that the care provider gave notice as it did not feel able to meet her needs safely. The care provider was also concerned Mrs A’s relatively high needs would impact their ability to provide care to the other tenants. The Council said it was not able to compel the care provider to continue with the care package and that it would explore whether another care provider could provide the package of care Mrs A would need to return home.
8. An investigation is not justified as there is insufficient evidence of fault. This is because the Council cannot force the care provider to continue with the care package and the care provider is allowed to give notice.
9. With regards to Ms X’s complaint the care provider shared information inappropriately, as this complaint is to do with how the care provider handled their personal data, this complaint is best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office. It is open to Ms X to make a complaint to that body.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, another body is better placed to consider her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman