Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council officer contacting the complainant’s GP surgery with concerns she might have dementia. This is because we would be unable to add to the response already provided via the Council’s investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains a Council officer contacted her GP surgery with concerns for her welfare, in that she might have dementia, after the officer misinterpreted a police officer’s report.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can decide whether to start an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
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 an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. We do not start an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X complained to the Council after an officer contacted her GP surgery with concerns for Mrs X’s welfare in that she might have dementia. The officer did so having misinterpreted a police officer’s report. The police officer had raised no such concerns. The GP asked Mrs X to attend the surgery. Mrs X attended and the GP had no concerns about Mrs X.
8. In its complaint response, the Council apologised to Mrs X for the impact this had on her. It explained the officer had misinterpreted the report and this led to her contacting Mrs X’s GP. The Council increased the officer’s level of supervision and support as a result of this complaint. It also asked Mrs X’s GP surgery to remove any reference to dementia from her records and it ensured this was completed.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation by this office would be unable to add to the response already provided by the Council’s investigation. The Council has explained the cause of the error; apologised; taken steps to prevent its recurrence and ensured the incorrect information is no longer held by her GP surgery. There is nothing further we could add to this.
10. Mrs X also raised issues around complaint handling. However, we will not consider complaint handling issues where we have decided not to consider the substantive complaint. This is because it is not good use of public resources to do so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman