Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a care provider commissioned by the Council not being safe. He also complains about the care provider giving notice to end his care package. This is because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome as we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that a care provider commissioned by the Council is not safe. He wants the Council to stop using the care provider to deliver care. He also complains about the care provider giving notice to end his care package.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

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 received services from a care provider. He said he had been sexually assaulted by two male carers and that one carer had also falsified the times he attended care calls. Mr X considers the care provider is unsafe and wants the Council to end its agreement with the care provider to provide care services.
6. The Council said the care provider investigated Mr X’s allegations and took appropriate disciplinary action against the care workers.
7. The framework agreement the Council has in place with the care provider details that the Council can terminate the agreement if the provider commits a material breach and has not remedied the breach to the satisfaction of the Council, or where the material breach is not capable of remedy. This agreement makes it clear it is at the Council’s discretion to decide whether to end an agreement with a service provider.
8. In this case, the Council noted it was satisfied with the care provider’s actions and that the care provider had taken Mr X’s concerns seriously. The Council is entitled to decide it is not necessary to end its agreement with the care provider. An investigation is therefore not justified as it would not lead to a different outcome as we cannot recommend the Council end contracting services with the care provider.
9. With regards to the notice being served by the care provider, the service specification between the Council and the care provider details that a minimum five days notice is required. In this case, the care provider gave Mr X 14 days notice. Therefore, an investigation on this point is not justified as the care provider has acted in line with its service specification.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome as we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman