Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms K’s complaint the Council and the care provider it commissioned have not provided suitable care for her mother, Mrs L, in her supported living accommodation. This is because there is little prospect of us achieving a worthwhile outcome for Mrs L or her family as Mrs L’s needs have been reassessed on leaving hospital and there are new decisions about her living arrangements in which the Ombudsman could not intervene.

The complaint

1. Ms K says the Council and the care provider it commissioned did not provide suitable care for her mother, Mrs L in her supported living accommodation. She complains the first issue was Mrs L had to go to hospital with unfamiliar staff to be told she had liver cancer, and there followed a long list of fault by the provider including:
1. about a month ago Mrs L was found without shoes and slippers and not properly dressed. She complained of being cold and the care worker did not know what had happened to her clothes. Ms K had to buy Mrs L some shoes and slippers.
2. Mrs L was found alone in town, over a mile from home, around mid-February 2020. She was breathless and unwell and should not have been out alone;
3. Mrs L does not receive a proper diet, is left sitting in her room with no interaction, and has had numerous falls. Ms K says she has evidence to show Mrs L is not getting the care she needs, and Mrs L currently has a black eye from a recent fall;
4. after a fall Mrs L was sent to hospital without a care worker. Hospital staff contacted Ms K after Mrs L’s care worker had turned up and was upsetting other patients. The care worker was sent off the ward and the hospital reported this as a safeguarding concern; and
5. the Council and care provider are trying hard to not let this case come out to the public, and concealing information from Ms K and her family, who need the truth to come out.
2. Ms K says she is deeply distressed and anxious. She has spent hours collecting what information she can. She wants to stop this from ever happening to another family, help to get Mrs L into the right care setting, and bring the matter to public attention rather than being covered up.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘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 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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered what Ms K said in her complaint and the information she sent with it. We asked the Council whether it had put Ms K’s complaints through its own procedures and I considered its reply. I have also given Ms K an opportunity to comment on a draft before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs L has a long history of mental ill health and has been in supported living accommodation. The Council commissioned the care provider to support her. In 2018 Ms K complained to the provider about a number of matters, and it investigated and responded. In 2019 she complained again and the provider responded in November 2019. Some of those complaints were different to the ones she has now brought to the Ombudsman. The provider accepted some fault in its communication with the family and provided explanations for other matters. It included reference to it having been the appointee for Mrs L’s state benefits, and the Council applying to the Court of Protection for deputyship which would allow it to manage Mrs L’s financial affairs.
6. The Council told us recently it had treated some of the 2019 concerns as safeguarding matters, and has done the same with another more recent issue. It also told us Mrs L was in hospital and it had appointed an Independent Mental Capacity Advocate (IMCA) to support Mrs L in any decisions about her living arrangements and support when she is ready to leave hospital.
7. Restrictions on movements imposed by government because of the coronavirus outbreak would likely affect the progress of arrangements for Mrs L and many others, and we must consider this when assessing what the Ombudsman could achieve by investigating this complaint.
8. Ms K has known about some of the events in her complaint for more than 12 months, so a complaint about them is late. Ms K could have complained to the Ombudsman about them at the time, and it is unlikely in the changing circumstances of Mrs L’s health that the Ombudsman could now achieve anything meaningful by investigating what happened in 2018. So there are no good reasons for us to do so.
9. Some of Ms K’s complaints are about having access to information about Mrs L. The Information Commissioner is best placed to consider those complaints so the Ombudsman will not investigate them.
10. On complaints a), b), and c) in paragraph 1, I note Mrs L had been in supported living rather than residential care. The nature and level of the support provided is not designed to be the same. From the information I have seen it is likely, on balance, Mrs L’s living arrangements had become less suitable. She has been in hospital, and Ms K told me she has now moved to a nursing home and will remain there. The Ombudsman could not achieve anything extra by investigating the provision of support over the last year or so; the most we would likely recommend is a reassessment of Mrs L’s needs, and that has already happened.
11. On complaint d), it is likely this incident is one the Council said it was treating as a safeguarding matter. There is nothing worthwhile the Ombudsman could achieve by investigating the same matter.
12. On complaint e), the Ombudsman carries out his work in private, so we would not bring Mrs L’s case and personal information to public attention. Nor would it be appropriate for family members to expose Mrs L’s information to the public. If Ms K considers the Council and care provider are concealing information from her she can complain to the ICO.
13. We do not know whether Mrs L has the mental capacity to make a decision about where she should live. The Council appointed an IMCA to support her in any decision making process which is its responsibility in law. (Mental Capacity Act 2005)
14. If Ms K is unhappy with any decision about future living arrangements for Mrs L, it would be reasonable for her (or the Council) to apply to the Court of Protection for a direction on the matter to resolve any dispute. The Ombudsman cannot do that.
15. On balance, and taking all the current conditions into account, I am satisfied it is unlikely the Ombudsman could achieve anything worthwhile for Ms K and Mrs L by investigating her complaint. Mrs L now has new living and support or care arrangements and Ms K accepts we could achieve nothing more.

Back to top

Final decision

16. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is little prospect of us achieving a worthwhile outcome for Mrs L or her family in all the circumstances.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman