Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Warwickshire County Council (18 014 148)

    Statement Upheld Other 18-Dec-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B complain about issues arising from respite care for their adult daughter, Ms X. They say the Council has not shown it has taken appropriate steps to ensure the provision is safe. They do not consider they can use the provision to provide respite and there are no other suitable facilities within an appropriate distance.

  • Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 005 587)

    Statement Not upheld Other 09-Dec-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B complain the Council refused to allow their relative to begin re-attending a day care centre she had previously attended, after she returned to her own home from residential care. The Ombudsman finds there was no fault by the Council in this matter.

  • Mayfield Care Ltd (19 007 097)

    Statement Not upheld Other 05-Dec-2019

    Summary: The investigation into this complaint will be discontinued. There is no fault by the Care Provider in keeping care fees in lieu of notice. Any further investigation by this office could not achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking, which is repayment of the care fees.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (19 007 350)

    Statement Not upheld Other 03-Dec-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complains that the care provider failed to properly investigate her complaint including an incident where her sister was attacked by another service user. The Ombudsman has discontinued his consideration of the complaint, as the Council has not had the opportunity to investigate and respond to the complaint.

  • Lincolnshire County Council (18 019 145)

    Statement Not upheld Other 02-Dec-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains that the Council placed his adult son, Mr M, in supported living accommodation without a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard, which was far away from the family home, and there was a lack of care. He says this caused Mr M's behaviour to escalate, caused him to gain weight, and led to him being detained under the Mental Health Act. Mr X says this caused him stress and inconvenience. The Ombudsman does not uphold Mr X's complaint. This is because we have found no evidence of fault.

  • Worcestershire County Council (18 010 645)

    Statement Upheld Other 29-Nov-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complains about Council arranged support for her daughter between April and August 2017. She also complains about a mental capacity assessment carried out in July 2016. The care provider failed to give adequate information about its out of hours service and failed to properly consider whether it was safe for Miss D to travel to the social club on her own in
    August 2017. Further, the Council failed to investigate and respond to Mr and Mrs X's concerns. The Council will apologise and pay
    Mrs X £350 for the injustice caused.

  • Surrey County Council (18 007 431)

    Statement Upheld Other 28-Nov-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen have upheld Miss X's complaint about Mr Y's placement with a supported accommodation provider, which was arranged and funded by the Council and the Clinical Commissioning Group.

  • Milton Keynes Council (17 018 823)

    Statement Upheld Other 26-Nov-2019

    Summary: Mrs B has complained about her daughter's treatment by a Council and a Trust on behalf of a Care Commissioning Group. The Ombudsmen find fault with the Council and Trust in relation to a lack of aftercare under s.117 of the Mental Health Act. They also uphold a complaint about the Council and Trust not refunding supported living fees. However, they do not find fault in relation to a residential move which broke down. The Council, Trust and Clinical Commissioning Group have agreed to a number of actions to remedy the impact of the identified faults.

  • Swindon Borough Council (18 019 376)

    Statement Upheld Other 22-Nov-2019

    Summary: Miss X complained about the poor standard of personal care she received at night. The Ombudsman has found the Council to be at fault. This fault caused Miss X distress and anxiety. To remedy this, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and review the service.

  • Surrey County Council (16 015 030)

    Statement Upheld Other 20-Nov-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found fault with the care provided to a woman with complex needs by several health and social care organisations. This included failure to arrange assessments and reviews, failures in transition planning and failure to make appropriate safeguarding referrals. This fault meant opportunities were missed to explore whether the woman had additional care needs. This also resulted in distress and uncertainty for her sister, who is pursuing the complaint on her behalf. The organisations concerned have agreed to take action to remedy the injustice to the complainants.