Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council completed safeguarding enquiries. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complained about how the Council completed safeguarding enquires, after a concern was raised about their care of an adult, Mr Y. They said the Council did not share the safeguarding concerns with them or ask them to provide their version of events. They said they have been found guilty of an offence and that the Council had not considered the full range of information.
2. Mr and Mrs X want financial compensation. They say the Council had damaged their reputation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect. An enquiry could range from a conversation with the person who is the subject of the concern, to a more formal multi-agency arrangement. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse. (section 42, Care Act 2014)
7. Mr Y lived with Mr and Mrs X. The Council received a safeguarding referral about their care of Mr Y. It decided the threshold for safeguarding was met. The following month it sought Mr Y’s views about the concerns. It spoke to Mr Y who was happy to live with a different carer whilst it completed its enquiries. The Council contacted Mr and Mrs X and told them about the referral. It also held a strategy meeting to discuss the concerns and consider next steps.
8. Mr and Mrs X wrote to the Council and resigned from their role as carers for Mr Y. The Council ended its enquiries. It wrote to Mr and Mrs X, confirming Mr Y would not return to their care. In a subsequent letter, the Council explained the reasons for the safeguarding. It said it had not shared the allegations sooner because it needed to understand Mr Y’s wishes and feelings. It also needed the Police to decide if there were grounds to investigate. Mr and Mrs X were unhappy and complained. The Council did not uphold their complaint.
9. Although Mr and Mrs X are unhappy with the Council’s complaint response, we will not investigate. The Council has set out its reasons for not involving Mr and Mrs X in its safeguarding enquiries at the outset. I appreciated this was frustrating for them however, it explained it needed to get Mr Y’s views. I have also reviewed the strategy meeting minutes and it is clear the Council had sufficient information to inform its enquiries without seeking additional evidence of Mr and Mrs X. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it made that decision to justify our involvement.
10. Mr and Mrs X believe the Council has found them guilty of a crime. The Council has confirmed that it had safeguarding concerns about their practice. It has not found them guilty of a crime.
11. There was a delay between the Council receiving the referral about Mr Y and him leaving Mr and Mrs X’s care, however, I do not consider that delay has caused Mr and Mrs X a significant injustice.
12. Mr and Mrs X also complained about delays in complaint handling. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint handling where we are not looking at the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman