Kent County Council (24 008 906)
Category : Adult care services > Domiciliary care
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 04 Sep 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to investigate her complaints alleging poor care provision towards her late friend, Mr Y. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s responses to Ms X.
The complaint
- Ms X complains Mr Y suffered neglect and poor care while he was living at a care placement funded by the Council.
- Ms X complains the Council has failed to investigate her complaints.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
- We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
- We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:
- their personal representative (if they have one), or
- someone we consider to be suitable.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- I have seen information showing the Council has written to Ms X twice explaining it cannot accept her complaints.
- The Council explains this is because she was not Mr Y’s official next of kin, and had no legal authority to represent him, such as being appointed as a deputy by the Court of Protection. The Council says Mr Y had not given his consent for Ms Y to act as his personal representative, when he was alive, in any context.
- As I have seen no information to show that Ms X is a suitable representative, to raise a complaint concerning Mr Y, there is no fault in the Council’s responses to Ms X.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s responses to Ms X.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman