Summary: Mr B complained the Council failed to respond properly to his concerns about a carer and he felt intimidated. We found the Council was at fault. However, Mr B has received an apology and the Council has agreed to provide guidance to the Care Provider when completing investigations. This in an appropriate resolution to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained that he felt intimidated by a comment by a carer at the extra-care facility where he was living. He said the Care Provider, on behalf of the Council, took too long to investigate his concerns. Mr B said the attitudes of other carers changed following his complaint. He says he was forced to move as a result of the alleged faults.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. We normally name care homes and other providers in our decision statements. However, we will not do so if we think someone could be identified from the name of the care home or care provider. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34H(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered a complaint form Mr B completed and I have discussed the matter with him. I have asked the Council for comments and considered its response with supporting information.
6. Mr B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Key facts

7. Mr B received two calls a day with two carers- Ms C and Ms D.
8. In June 2020, Ms C made a threatening comment to Mr B when he challenged her about a comment she made a few days earlier. Mr B’s son said Ms C had shouted at Mr B. However, Ms D, who was present at the time did not agree with Mr B’s son and said he did not witness the incident as he was in another room. The following day Mr B’s son had removed the key from the key safe so the carers could not gain access to the property.
9. The Care Provider’s manager, Ms E, visited Mr B the following day. Mr B explained what had happened and Ms E assured him that Ms C would no longer attend to complete his care calls. Ms E explained that due to annual leave it may take longer to respond formally to Mr B’s complaint.
10. The Care Provider responded to Mr B’s complaint in mid-August 2020. It apologised for the delay in responding. The response said:
• Ms C accepted she made the comment and this was inappropriate and her behaviour could be seen as hostile and unprofessional. The Care Provider apologised.
• It confirmed there was an internal investigation and disciplinary procedure underway. Finally, it invited Mr B to raise any further concerns either directly with the Care Provider or the Ombudsman.
11. Mr B complained to the Ombudsman in September 2020. In the interim, he moved to new accommodation.
12. In response to my enquiries, the Council provided the following comments:
• Mr B wrote to the Care Provider to let it know he would complain to the Ombudsman and ask that this care not be compromised. Ms E assured him it would not. Mr B did not raise any further concerns about his carers.
• Mr B applied directly to the new housing provider to move and the Council was therefore not aware of his reasons for requesting the move. However, it said there was no indication at the time that he was unhappy in his previous accommodation.
• In respect of the Care Provider’s investigation into the incident it confirmed Ms E had interviewed the witness Ms D about the incident but had not kept written records of that conversation. The Council said it would discuss the process of investigations including timescales and recording with the Care Provider.

Analysis

13. The Care Provider, on behalf of the Council has accepted that Ms C’s behaviour was inappropriate. That was fault. As a result, Mr B said he felt threatened and intimidated in his accommodation. However, the Care Provider immediately removed Ms C from Mr B’s care calls, investigated the matter, and apologised. I consider this response remedies any injustice Mr B suffered.
14. It took two months for the Care Provider to send a response to Mr B about his complaint. That was fault. The information provided by the Council indicates the Care Provider told Mr B about the potential delay and it has already apologised for that delay. That remedies any injustice caused.
15. As part of its investigation the Care Provide interviewed Ms D who witnessed the incident. The Care Provide did not keep records of that interview. That was fault. The Council has confirmed it would address this with the Care Provider to ensure it fully understands its responsibilities around completing complaint investigations.
16. In relation to the attitudes of carers, Mr B said previous carers used to stay and have a conversation with him if they had time at the end of a call but stopped doing this as they had limited time. I accept Mr B’s assertion that the carers no longer stay and talk to him. However, I do not consider there is evidence to link this to Mr C’s behaviour. Lack of time and different carers are a more reasonable explanation for the change. The Council was not at fault.
17. Mr B says he was forced to move as he felt intimidated. I cannot conclude that Mr B’s move was the Council’s fault. Mr B did not raise ongoing concerns, either with the Care Provider or Council, about Ms C attending calls for other residents or that he felt intimidated by this. It was Mr B’s choice to change accommodation. The Council was not at fault.

Back to top

Final decision

18. There is evidence of fault in Ms C’s actions which the Care Provider and Council have accepted. The Care Provider has remedied any injustice Mr B suffered. Therefore I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman