Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint, brought by Mr Y, about the Care Provider forging signatures on a care contract document and how it investigated the matter. There is insufficient significant injustice to justify us investigating and we cannot achieve the complaint outcome sought.

The complaint

1. Mrs X received domiciliary care from the Care Provider. Her son Mr Y complains the care provider:
1. fabricated Mrs X’s signature on a contract document;
2. blamed the forgery on a staff member who had left the firm;
3. has not properly investigated the matter.
2. Mr Y says the matter has caused Mrs X financial loss, and stress to both of them, but seeks no remedy for either. Mr Y instead wants the Care Provider to investigate properly, to include its higher management and an outside agency interviewing the relevant care firm manager.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. 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:

• the action has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mr Y and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X and Mr Y sought documents from the care provider. They received a copy of the contract which they consider had not been signed by Mrs X. On receiving and responding to their complaint, the Care Provider agreed the signatures were not consistent with other samples of Mrs X's signature on their files. Mr Y was not satisfied with the Care Provider’s investigation and its conclusions about who had fabricated the signatures.
6. Even if there has been fault around the Care Provider’s handling of the contract document, we will not investigate. Mrs X and Mr Y imply she has been affected financially by this issue but give no details of this. Mrs X received care provision from the firm and paid for it. If a contract document was never signed by her, a contract was still implicitly created by the provision of care by the firm and Mrs X’s acceptance of and payment for it. There is insufficient evidence of a financial loss to Mrs X by the contract matter complained of to warrant us investigating.
7. We note Mr Y also refers to the matter causing him and Mrs X great stress. While the issue may have caused some upset to them both and affected their trust in the Care Provider, this does not amount to such a significant personal injustice to justify an investigation. Mr Y also states in his complaint to us that they are not seeking a remedy for any stress.
8. The core issue in Mrs X and Mr Y’s complaint amounts to an allegation of forgery and fraud, and the outcome sought is an investigation of the Care Provider, to include an outside body. Forgery and fraud are criminal matters which are for the police to investigate. If Mrs X and Mr Y consider they have been victims of these offences, they may wish to report this to the police. The police would be the appropriate third-party body to consider the allegations. It would be for police officers to determine what investigation they should conduct and what action they should take, if any. We do not investigate allegations of crime so would not be a suitable organisation to investigate the matter raised here. That we cannot achieve the complaint outcome Mrs X and Mr Y seek is a further reason why we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• there is insufficient significant injustice to her and Mr Y to justify us investigating; and
• we cannot achieve the complaint outcome sought.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman