Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her father’s social worker. She says the social worker failed to keep her up to date with what was happening, failed to give her all the information she needed to make informed decisions, and failed to update her by email as requested. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains her about her father’s social worker. She says the social worker did not keep her up to date with what was happening and failed to give her all the information she needed to make informed decisions. She also complains the social worker failed to update her by email as requested.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X’s father, Mr Z, was admitted to hospital following a fall. During his admission, concerns were raised regarding Mr Z’s capacity to manage his personal care and to remain safe in the community. Mr Z was assessed as lacking insight into his care and support needs when making plans regarding his discharge.
6. Miss X has power of attorney to manage Mr Z’s health and welfare, and financial matters. Miss X’s mother, Mrs Z, also has power of attorney. Records showed Miss X and her mother disagreed over how Mr Z’s care and support needs should be met following discharge from hospital.
7. The case records showed two best interest meetings were held, involving both Miss X and her mother. The Council detailed the views of both Miss X and Mrs Z. As no agreement could be reached between Miss X and her mother, the Council referred the matter to the Court of Protection. The Council confirmed proceedings are still ongoing, but the Court made a best interest decision for Mr Z to move to a care home in April 2024.
8. Miss X said she asked the social worker to contact her by email, rather than by phone. The case records shows the social worker initially contacted Miss X by phone in February and March 2024. There is a case note at the end of March 2024 where Miss X is noted not to be accepting calls and requested an update by email. Records show there were two more attempts by the social worker to contact Miss X by phone following this. After this, all other communication was though email.
9. An investigation is not justified as the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice. It is accepted the social worker may have attempted to contact Miss X by phone after she had asked for communication via email. However, records showed Miss X did not answer and the social worker subsequently communicated with Miss X by email.
10. Miss X also complained the social worker failed to give her all the information needed to make an informed decision, rushed her into making decisions, and failed to keep her updated.
11. An investigation is not justified on this complaint point as we are not likely to find fault. The records showed the social worker kept Miss X updated and provided information regarding the various care options. Records also showed Miss X was involved in the two best interest meetings held. There is no evidence to suggest the social worker failed to update Miss X on what was happening with her father.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the alleged fault has not caused any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman