Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about communication from an adult social care social worker. This is because there is not a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms D says her relative, Mr E’s, adult social care social worker is unprofessional. Ms D says the social worker has:

• Not supported Mr E to change appointee,
• Failed to complete required mental capacity assessments,
• Talked poorly to Mr E about Ms D,
• Failed to follow correspondence up in writing, or with Ms D, despite telling Mr E she would do so because he cannot retain the information,
• Discussed Ms D’s personal business with Mr E which made him worry,
• Been difficult to contact.

2. These are just some examples. Ms D says despite raising concerns with the social worker’s manager the Council’s service and communication has not improved, which is having an impact on Ms D and Mr E.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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. The Council did not respond to all concerns in its complaint response, it only referred to one telephone conversation, after which Mr E raised concerns. The Council did not find the social worker at fault, but said it would arrange a different staff member to complete relevant mental capacity assessments with Mr E.
7. It is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about.  We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.
8. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
9. I appreciate Mr E’s and Ms D’s frustration, but this is not significant enough to justify our involvement. They could ask the Council to follow up meetings and telephone calls with Mr E in writing as a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act 2010 because he struggles to retain information.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms D’s complaint because there is not a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman