Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council agreed to commission a placement for her father which proved not to be appropriate and he received poor care. This is because the Council has considered the matters we would expect it to consider in the decision-making process, we cannot now recommend a remedy for Mr C for any injustice he may have suffered as a result of fault by the Council and we normally expect people to complain to the Care Quality Commission about possible breaches of standards.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs B, complained that the Council agreed to commission a placement for her father, Mr C, which proved not to be appropriate and he received poor care. Mrs B told us she has had many sleepless nights because of what happened.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. 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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the information Mrs B provided and given her an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Where councils commission care services from a social care provider we can treat the actions of the care provider as if they were the actions of that council.
6. Mrs B says Mr C’s family accepted the placement the Council had identified because it seemed appropriate for his needs. But she told us it became apparent after two days it was not an appropriate place for Mr C. She says the home agreed to reassess him. She says the home should have looked at the appropriateness of the placement in the week before his move there from hospital. Mrs B says the Council failed to provide any guidance.
7. Sadly, Mr C passed away before his family could move him. Mrs B says there were many incidents in the home considering Mr C was only in there for two days after leaving hospital.
8. The Council has replied to Mrs B’s complaint but she feels it did not look into it thoroughly enough.
9. Our role is to look at the Council’s decision-making process. We cannot question the Council’s decision on Mr C’s placement if there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision. In its response to Mrs B’s complaint the Council said the type of care agreed in Mr C’s case was not decided by its brokerage team. It says as well as the social worker’s assessment there was a meeting attended by Mr C’s family, a representative from Continuing Health Care and from the hospital ward. The care home had agreed it could meet Mr C’s needs. In this case the Council has considered the matters we would expect it to consider in the decision-making process.
10. Mrs B feels the home neglected her father. She says someone hurt him there on the day he was admitted back into hospital. The Council has confirmed there was a safeguarding referral and its adults safeguarding enquiry team made enquiries. The team subsequently closed the case without taking further action.
11. We cannot now recommend a remedy for Mr C for any injustice he may have suffered as a result of fault by the Council. Part of the remedy Mrs B is seeking is for the home should be put under some sort of supervision. We are not a regulator. We normally expect someone to complain to the Care Quality Commission about possible breaches of standards. That is because it is the regulatory body for social care. Part of its role is to make sure social care services provide people with safe, high-quality care.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has considered the matters we would expect it to consider in the decision-making process, we cannot now recommend a remedy for Mr C for any injustice he may have suffered as a result of fault by the Council and we normally expect people to complain to the Care Quality Commission about possible breaches of standards.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman