Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s response to concerns she raised regarding her mother Ms Y’s care. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to provide a worthwhile outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained on her mother Ms Y’s behalf that the care provider commissioned by the Council failed to properly investigate her complaint after Ms Y suffered a fall.
2. Ms X complained this matter has caused her distress and upset.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X’s mother Ms Y was previously receiving a care package from a provider commissioned by the Council until May 2022 when Ms Y suffered a fall whilst out with her carer.
7. Ms Y complained to the Council after the incident, citing negligent behaviour on the part of the carer and general issues she had identified with the care Ms Y had received such as the accuracy of carers’ notes. The evidence shows the complaint was not registered formally until September 2022 and the Council did not provide Ms X with a complaint response until February 2023.
8. The Council confirmed the Care Provider contacted it following Ms Y’s fall and conducted an interview with the carer involved. The carer’s account of what happened was different to Ms X’s, but the Care Provider held meetings with the carers involved with Ms Y’s care to discuss Ms X’s concerns and reflect on lessons that could be learned from the incident. Regarding the other concerns Ms Y raised, the Care Provider investigated and did not uncover evidence of fault. The Council acknowledged the poor communication Ms X had experienced and told her it would issue a reminder to the Care Provider to ensure it investigated future complaints in line with the proper process.
9. Ms X remains unhappy with the situation and wants us to find the Council at fault. The evidence shows the Care Provider took Ms X’s concerns seriously and investigated them. The Care Provider took proportionate action to address the shortcomings identified and likely would have taken further action had the care package continued. The Council also acted on the information it received and took action to ensure these issues did not reoccur. An investigation would therefore be unlikely to provide a worthwhile outcome as the Council has already responded to the complaint in the manner we would expect. With regards to delay Ms X experienced in receiving the Council’s formal response, as we cannot investigate the substantive complaint, we cannot investigate the Council’s complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to provide a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman