Summary: Ms X complains about the tone of communication she received from a member of staff at the day centre her disabled brother attends. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Ms X to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, complains about the tone of communication she received from a member of staff at the day centre her disabled brother attends. She says the last sentence of one email and a message left for her in the day centre’s message book were condescending, bullying and passive aggressive.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Ms X and gave her the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms X is the court appointed deputy for her disabled brother, Mr T. Mr T attends a day centre four days a week.
5. In March 2020 a member of staff from the day centre, who I refer to as Mr Q, left a message for Ms X in the day centre’s message book relating to the matter of a ripped coat belonging to Mr T.
6. In June 2020, Ms T received an email written by Mr Q about communication with Mr T during the lockdown, the last sentence of which said “If you do not wish to continue for your brother to receive such calls then I can discontinue it(sic)”.
7. Ms X wrote to the Council to complain about the message in the book and the last sentence of the June email. She said the wording was condescending, bullying and passive aggressive.
8. The Council did not uphold the complaint about the wording of the message or email. It acknowledged the message in the day centre book could have been better phrased and said that the phrasing of messages would be discussed with staff as part of their ongoing development.
9. With regard to the last sentence in the email, it explained the contents of the email that had been forwarded to her had been drafted as a guide/template to assist staff in responding to emails from carers and family members who did not want weekly contact from the care staff. It said the draft had not been intended to be sent in its current form and apologised for the error.
10. Unhappy with the Council’s response to her complaint, Ms X complained to the Ombudsman.

Assessment

11. While I note Ms X is dissatisfied with the Council’s response to her complaint, neither the claimed fault nor the injustice caused to Ms X are at a level sufficient to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Ms X to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman