Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the quality of care her mother (Mrs Y) received. The Care Provider and the Council have already taken appropriate action to address the issues raised. Further investigation by us can achieve nothing more or the outcome Miss X wants.

The complaint

1. Miss X is complaining on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y. Mrs Y sustained a head injury when carers working for Company Z mishandled her in bed. Miss X wants Company Z to admit wrongdoing and to dismiss the staff involved.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further 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. The Council did not commission the care provided by Company Z for Mrs Y. It has completed safeguarding enquiries to investigate what happened. The Council held an online safeguarding adults meeting which Company Z, Mrs Y and Miss X attended. Company Z and the Council accepted the accident leading to Mrs Y sustaining a head injury should not have happened. The Council was satisfied with the action Company Z had taken since to address the concerns Miss X raised. The Council noted Company Z no longer provided care to Mrs Y.
6. The Council did not directly commission care services from Company Z for Mrs Y. Because of this, it had a limited role in managing the quality of care delivered by Company Z. The Council’s action to complete safeguarding enquiries following Mrs Y’s head injury was a reasonable and proportionate response to the concerns Miss X had raised. There is unlikely to be further evidence beyond that the Council has considered that would justify us investigating this matter further.
7. We, like the Council, cannot compel Company Z to take the action Miss X wants to dismiss the staff involved. Disciplinary matters of this nature fall outside our jurisdiction. We will not investigate because we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X wants.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because nothing more could be achieved by us investigating and we cannot provide the outcome the complainant wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman