Summary: Ms X complains the Council was at fault in the way it responded to her requests for information and access to see her mother, Mrs Y. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters so have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Ms X complains there were failings in the way the Council dealt with her requests for information and access to see her mother, Mrs Y. In particular Ms X complains:
• The Council refuses to provide her with information about Mrs Y and is preventing her from having contact with her mother.
• The Council has failed to respond to her concerns her father, Mr Y lacks mental capacity and cannot care for Mrs Y.
• Mrs Y is now living in a care home due to her poor health. Ms X wishes spend time with Mrs Y without any visiting restrictions in place.
• Ms X believes the Council has held meetings about her to discuss whether she can visit Ms Y and wrongly considered her abusive towards Mrs Y.
• The Council sent the Police to Ms X’s property to carry out a welfare check on her.
• The Council failed to properly consider her complaints through the formal complaint procedure by not progressing her concerns raised in November 2020.
2. Ms X says the matter has caused her distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint,

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

4. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) considers complaints about freedom of Information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered the information submitted by Ms X and discussed the complaint with her. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided.
7. Ms X 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

Background to the complaint

8. Ms X’s parents, Mr and Mrs Y live in the council’s area. Ms X lives in separate accommodation in a neighbouring council’s area I will refer to as Council B.
9. Mrs Y was diagnosed with dementia in 2009. The Council became involved with Mr and Mrs Y in 2010 and 2012 following safeguarding referrals from incidents allegedly caused by Ms X at Mr and Mrs Y’s home. On both occasions Mr and Mrs Y declined support from the Council’s Adult Social Care services. The Council has been providing Mr and Mrs Y with care and support in more recent years.
10. Ms X contacted Council officers in November 2020 asking for information about Mrs Y. The officers explained they could not provide the information as they did not have consent to share it with Ms X. The officers expressed concern about Ms X’s mental health as she was upset over the responses. The officers asked Council B to arrange a welfare check on her. Council B contacted the police who visited Ms X.
11. Ms X complained to the Council. The Council responded to Ms X’s concerns. The Council confirmed it was providing a care package to Mrs Y, but advised Ms X
• It could not discuss the arrangements for Mrs Y’s care and Ms X’s lack of involvement with the care unless Mrs Y agreed to it. As the Council considered Mrs Y lacked mental capacity the decision was for Mr Y as Mrs Y’s next of kin.
• It had not placed any restrictions on Ms X contacting Adult Social Care to talk about Mrs Y. But it was limited in the information it could share with her as Mr Y had not agreed to it doing so.
• The Council considered Mr Y had mental capacity to decide about sharing information with Ms X. It says it has no evidence to suggest Mr Y lacks capacity.
• The Council was not placing any restrictions on Ms X seeing Mrs Y. This was a decision by Mr Y and the rest of the family. The Council said it could not and has not become involved with the arrangement as it was a decision for Ms X’s family.
• The Council confirmed it had responded to a complaint from Ms X’s solicitors about not sharing information on Mrs Y in October 2019. The Council received no further contact from the solicitors or Ms X until November 2020. The officer who recorded Ms X’s complaint in November 2020 noted the complaint response in 2019. The officer emailed Ms X to advise the Council had previously dealt with her concerns and the situation about information sharing remained the same.
• The Council confirmed it could not investigate some of Ms X’s concerns as they were based on information given to her by a family member. The Council considered it was to do with relationships within the family which it could not become involved in.
• The Council confirmed it had not held any meetings about Ms X so had not referred to her as abusive. But Ms X should make a Subject Access Request (SAR) to the Council for any information it may hold about her and request copies of minutes of meetings she considered had been held about her.
• The Council explained it made a welfare referral to Council B due to concerns about Ms X’s mental health. Council B contacted the Police who agreed to visit Ms X. The Council said it made the referral as it has duty of care and was acting on concerns about Ms X. The Council apologised if Ms X was distressed by the visit. But considered it was fulfilling its duty of care towards her.

The Council’s response to Ms X’s complaint

12. The Council responded to my enquiries about Ms X’s complaint. It says it has been in contact with Ms X for many years as she has alleged Mr Y incapable of looking after Mrs Y. The Council confirms it has investigated the allegations, but it has not had any concerns about Mr Y caring for Mrs Y. The Council says the allegations have not been substantiated by either itself or the police after investigating according to its Adult Safeguarding procedures.
13. The Council confirms its Adult Social Care service has been continuously supporting both Mr and Mrs Y with their well-being, safety, and care needs for many years. The Council says it will continue to monitor and review the situation and manage any risks to Mr and Mrs Y.

My assessment

14. The evidence I have seen shows the Council has explained to Ms X it cannot release information about Mrs Y to her. This is because it does not have consent to do so from Mr Y who is Mrs Y’s next of kin. I am aware Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision and finds it upsetting. But it is a decision the Council is entitled to make and there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has reached its decision. This is because it has been mindful of the rights of Mr and Mrs Y when considering Ms X’s requests to release information.
15. The Council has explained to Ms X why it will not investigate some parts of her complaints made in November 2020. This is because it dealt with the issue about information sharing in 2019 and some points were based on information given to Ms X by her family. It is a decision for the Council to make as to the complaints it will investigate. But the evidence shows it has responded to Ms X’s complaints in detail and explained the Council’s position on her issues of concern. So, I do not consider I can add anything by further investigation into the issues already considered by the Council. I also do not consider any further investigation would result in a different outcome for Ms X.
16. The Council has confirmed it has not been involved in making the decision about Ms X visiting Mrs Y or placing any restrictions on her. The decision was made by Mr Y and the family. So, it is a private matter between Ms X and the rest of her family.
17. The Council confirms it has not held any meetings to discuss Ms X or about her visiting Mrs Y. But it has advised Ms X to make a SAR if she wishes to see any information, she believes may be held about her by the Council. The Council can then consider the request. If Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s request, she can complain to the ICO. The ICO is the UK’s authority on data protection matters including SAR requests. It can decide whether the Council has not responded properly to Ms X’s request and therefore is best placed to deal with this part of Ms X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I am completing my investigation. I have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council has responded to Ms X’s request for information and access to see Mrs Y.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman