Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her mother’s respite stay. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to lead to a different remedy than the one already offered by the care provider.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about her mother’s respite stay. Miss X says her mother needed peace, quiet, and support, because of her mental health issues. But Miss X complains the resident in the room next to her mother regularly shouted out. Miss X says this made her mother anxious and feels the respite stay was mis-sold. Miss X is also unhappy with the way her complaints have been dealt with. Miss X’s father stayed with the care provider for respite care and she is happy with the care he received.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. 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 could add to any previous investigation by the care provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered Miss X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I also gave Miss X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. The care provider has responded to complaints from Miss X. It has explained that only two rooms were available, and the room given to Miss X’s mother was in the quieter part of the care home. It accepted the resident in the next room did call out, but there is a dispute about how often this happened. The care provider apologised for the way Miss X’s complaint was dealt with. It offered a refund of £1100 – this is one week of Miss X’s mother’s respite fees.
5. In deciding whether to investigate a complaint we need to consider what we could achieve for the person complaining. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. The Ombudsman does not award ‘compensation’, but we can recommend payments to remedy injustice caused by fault.
6. Based on the evidence available, I do not believe an investigation by the Ombudsman would add anything to the care provider’s response. Miss X is clearly unhappy with her mother’s respite stay, and I recognise the impact another resident’s behaviour may have had. But Miss X’s mother received four weeks of care, even if the standard was not what Miss X and her mother expected. On balance, the care provider’s offer to refund one week of care fees is more than an investigation by the Ombudsman would be likely to recommend. An investigation is not therefore appropriate.
7. Miss X is also unhappy with the way her complaints have been dealt with. But we will not normally investigate a care provider’s complaint handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. This applies here.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to lead to a different remedy than the one already offered by the care provider.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman