Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A’s complaint about the Council distributing minutes of a meeting she says are inaccurate and not reflective of what was said. This is because Mrs A can ask the Council to put a copy of her views on file and if she is concerned the minutes contain incorrect data about her, she can ask the Information Commissioner’s office (ICO) to consider her complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs A says the Council did not accurately record what was said in a meeting she attended in August 2018 and it delayed in producing the minutes and sending her a copy. Mrs A is concerned the inaccurate minutes were given to her mother Mrs B, which has further impacted on her access to visit Mrs B and input into her care. Mrs A says she want sight of communication before it is sent to Mrs B’s attorneys and a copy of the Council’s response sent to the Office Public Guardian for their files.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information and documentation Mrs A provided. I sent Mrs A a copy of my draft decision and considered her comments on it.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs A travelled to Cornwall to attend a Best Interest Options Meeting about Mrs B’s care needs. Mrs B has been assessed as not having capacity to decide her own care needs and lives with her son, one of two sons, who have Power of Attorney for her finances and health and wellbeing.
5. When Mrs A and other family members attended they were advised by Mrs B’s Independent advocate that she did not want to attend and wanted the best interests meeting to go ahead with her and her attorney’s only. The Council agreed, as Mrs A had travelled some distance, to have an alternative meeting and relay her wishes and views back to Mrs B.
6. Mrs A complained that it was not a best interest’s meeting and about the delay in producing and distributing the minutes. The Council upheld Mrs A’s complaints. It explained the meeting was originally planned as a Best Interest Meeting, but this changed when Mrs B declined to attend. The Council says it has spoken to the social worker involved about the importance of explaining the purpose of meetings and about being clearer in the language used-particularly when asking people to travel distances. It explained the unacceptable delay in producing and distributing the minutes was because the Chair of the meeting was absent from work. The Ombudsman could achieve not more than this even if he investigated and is satisfied an apology and the additional actions remedy the injustice caused.
7. Mrs A says the social worker did not properly consider her views. The Council explained Mrs A’s views were not dismissed by the social worker who consulted with her and other family members. It explained capacity is presumed unless an assessment has been undertaken to identify a person lacks capacity to make a specific decision. Mrs B decided she did not want to attend the meeting with Mrs A and these views were explained to Mrs A and family members by her independent advocate. The Ombudsman could not say this is fault.
8. Mrs B lacks capacity around her care needs, so her attorney’s will make decisions about her care on her behalf. If Mrs A is concerned the decisions taken by Mrs B’s attorneys are not in her best interests, she can ask the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) to consider her concerns.
9. Mrs A complained the minutes, once received, contained inaccurate and incorrect information which would have exacerbated family relations and upset Mrs B.
10. The Ombudsman could not make a finding on the accuracy of the minutes about what was said in a meeting he was not present. The minutes explain there was no formal minute taker and agreed the notes are unclear and whilst representing a summary, are not a full representation of the meeting. Mrs A has produced a copy of her recollection of the meeting which the Council can keep on file. It is not the role of the Council to send a copy of Mrs A’s views to Mrs B or the OPG as Mrs A suggests. If Mrs A is concerned the minutes produced by the Council contain inaccurate information about her she can contact the information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and ask it to consider her concerns. Information about the ICO can be found on the website below:

https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mrs A can ask the Council to put a copy of her views on file and if she is concerned the minutes contain incorrect data about her, she can ask the Information Commissioner’s office (ICO) to consider her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman