Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care and support the Council provided to the complainant’s neighbour following their discharge from hospital. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr D complains about the way the Council placed someone in a neighbouring property following their discharge from hospital. Mr D says the Council uses the property to place people who usually have drug or alcohol issues and they make noise. He says the Council did not make sure the person had proper care and support in place and its officer did nothing except lie about the situations when
   Mr D reported his concerns. Mr D says he remains unhappy with the Council’s procedures and wants it to investigate the officer involved.

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 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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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. Mr D lives near a property the Council uses as a discharge to assess placement. He complained to the Council about incidents involving a person (X) the Council had placed in the property. Mr D told the Council he had concerns about X being left in the property without proper care and support in place. He said he had found X in the hallway of the property in a vulnerable state. He also referred to a fire hazard where the emergency services needed to be called.
6. The Council responded to the complaint and said the property was used to assess people following discharge from hospital. It said the property provided a safe environment for people.
7. The Council confirmed X had been assessed and the property approved as a suitable placement. It said on reviewing its records it had followed established procedures to support X’s wellbeing.
8. In relation to Mr D’s complaint about the Council’s officer it said Mr D may have felt its officer was vague with details because they could not disclose personal information about X to Mr D as it was restricted by data protection regulations. Overall, it found its officer had conduct had been professional and appropriate.
9. We will not investigate Mr D’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr D’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman