Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about care provided to her late father, Mr C. This is because we could not provide a remedy for any injustice caused to Mr C from any fault an investigation might uncover as he is now deceased. Ms B has not been caused a significant enough injustice from the actions of Mr C’s care provider to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains her late father’s, Mr C’s, care provider has not answered all her queries about his weight loss, his medication, incidents which happened involving Mr C she discovered on receiving access to his records including why and how he was able to access alcohol.

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 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

3. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. The complainant now has an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms B has not had the answers she wants to her questions about Mr C’s care but it is not the role of the Ombudsman to provide her with these. The care provider acknowledged it should have advised Ms B of Mr C’s weight loss and apologised this did not happen. It explained Mr C’s weight loss was being monitored but he was a healthy weight, and his GP has no concerns. It also apologised it did not inform her of the delay in Mr C’s GP arranging for his prescription to be sent and confirmed it did not receive it from the GP surgery until after his discharge, so the recommencement of the medication did not happen.
8. Ms B was concerned when she received access to Mr C’s records she had not been informed of incidences recorded about some of Mr C’s behaviours which were distressing for him and other residents. Ms B was concerned Mr C’s change in behaviour may have been due to the changes in his medication. The care provider explained Mr C had advanced dementia and although there were times of minor conflict and misunderstandings, none of which resulted in harm or had serious consequences, for most of the time he was happy and settled in the home. It acknowledged Ms B was unable to visit and see him like this as it was during the Covid-19 pandemic when visiting was not allowed. The care provider explained it could not comment on medical matters or say whether the medication or ceasing of it had caused the change in behaviour.
9. Ms B remains unhappy and wants the Ombudsman to investigate. She says she has not had answers as to how Mr C was able to access alcohol and with his liver condition is concerned he should not have been given any. While the care provider had not answered this question, we would not investigate this point now. We could not provide a remedy for Mr C even if we found he did eat very little and lost a lot of weight because of the actions of his care provider, or if there were restrictions in place that he should not have been given access to alcohol because he is now deceased. Not knowing if there was or was not safeguarding restrictions in place to ensure Mr C did not have access to alcohol does not disadvantage Ms B significantly enough for us to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we could not provide a remedy for any injustice caused to Mr C from any fault an investigation might uncover as he is now deceased. Ms B has not been caused a significant enough injustice from the actions of Mr C’s care provider to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman