Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council changing arrangements for an adult social care meeting. We could not add value by further investigating the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council excluded him from parts of a meeting he had organised with the mental health team, and blamed someone else. He said this led to him losing contact with his social worker and being discharged from the mental health service. He wanted the Council to admit fault and apologise.

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:

• 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 X arranged a meeting with his social worker, with the support of his mental health worker. Mr X says on the day of the meeting, he attended but was told he could not join the first half of the meeting. He says the social worker had also invited several other attendees without his knowledge. He complained to the Council.
6. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint and explained the social worker had noticed there were two meetings arranged, and decided to merge them but that this had not been communicated to Mr X. The Council explained the social worker had agreed to ensure Mr X was better informed in the future.
7. While the Council did not include an apology in its complaint response, it clearly identified Mr X should have been informed about the changes to the meeting arrangements and explained its intentions for ensuring the same issue did not reoccur.
8. It is not proportionate to investigate this complaint, as doing so would not add to the investigation the Council already carried out. We would not be able to say the above issue was the cause for Mr X subsequently losing contact with his social worker or being discharged from the mental health service. It is unlikely we could achieve a more meaningful outcome for Mr X by investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add value to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman