Recent statements in this category are shown below:
Statement Not upheld Other 18-Feb-2019
Summary: It was not fault for the care provider to require payments which are overdue. The actions of the care provider have not caused injustice to Mrs P.
Statement Not upheld Other 15-Feb-2019
Summary: There is no fault by the Council in this complaint. The Council did not know of Mr X's existence until 2017, so it could not have consulted him sooner on decisions about his late mother's care.
Statement Not upheld Other 13-Feb-2019
Summary: The investigation into this complaint will be discontinued because the Council has not had the opportunity to investigate the complaint.
Statement Upheld Other 07-Feb-2019
Summary: The Council failed to undertake a thorough and timely safeguarding investigation. This leaves uncertainty about whether the outcome might be different had it gathered relevant information at the time, and scrutinised the Care Provider's version of events. The Council took too long to investigate the complaint, reach its conclusions, and complete an action plan. Miss C and her family are distressed that Miss C was not at the centre of the safeguarding enquiry, and the Council did not enable her to achieve resolution and recovery. They have lost trust in the Council because of these failings. The Council will pay Miss C £500, and her parents £500. It will apologise in person and discuss ways to rebuild the trust and working relationship. It will evidence the actions it has taken to improve procedures, in line with its action plan.
Statement Upheld Other 04-Feb-2019
Summary: There was fault in the way the Council communicated with Mr B about the review of his mother's care plan and the way it carried out the review. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and his mother and pay £150 for the distress it caused.
Statement Upheld Other 29-Jan-2019
Summary: The complainant says the Council failed to properly manage her sister's care and support in a residential home and to deal properly with safeguarding complaints. The Council says it has followed the correct procedures, considered all concerns and is satisfied the resident is receiving suitable care. The Ombudsman finds the Council acted without fault in responding to complaints about the care services offered but that a fault occurred in not telling relatives about a resident's fall and procedures changed to prevent that happening again.
Statement Upheld Other 25-Jan-2019
Summary: Mr B complains that the Council failed to provide him with adequate support and the carer's' assessment it completed for his mother was late and inadequate. He also says the Council failed to properly assess his needs and provide a service to meet his eligible needs. The Ombudsman finds the Council delayed in completing a carer's assessment and, when the assessment was done, it was not as comprehensive as it should have been. There was also fault in that officers who assessed Mr B's needs did not have autism training or previous experience of working with adults with autism and did not consult anyone with such experience. The Ombudsman has recommended a remedy for the injustice suffered by Mr B.
Statement Upheld Other 23-Jan-2019
Summary: The complainants say the Care Provider failed to provide suitable care and support during the complainants' stay at the Care Provider's home. The Care Provider accepts the service provided fell below expected standards and agrees to re-imburse the complainant for the cost of the stay. The Ombudsman finds the poor service resulted in an injustice to the complainant.
Statement Not upheld Other 23-Jan-2019
Summary: Ms X complains the Council has failed to provide her with social care support or assistance with her housing situation. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Ms X's requests for care and support, and assistance with her housing.
Statement Upheld Other 18-Jan-2019
Summary: There was fault in the way the Council calculated Mr C's personal budget and in the way the Council calculated backdated payments. There was also fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr C's complaints. There is evidence the Council promised an investigation and management review of Mr C's complaints would take place, but it did not carry this out and denied having offered this. There was also confusion about whether the Council had applied its unreasonable and vexatious complaints policy.