Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about conduct of staff. This is because we do not have jurisdiction to consider personnel matters. Further investigation could not add to the Care Provider’s response, and we are satisfied with the actions taken by the Care Provider.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained about the conduct of Management and personnel staff at her father’s, Mr C’s, Extra Care Facility (ECF) accommodation. Ms B says she and Mr C are concerned about the integrity and trustworthiness of Management. Ms B complained there was reference to a telephone conversation with Mr C which had not taken place, the inaccuracy and false recording of a meeting she attended, false information which said Mr C had asked for yellow bags to be emptied daily when he had not requested this service and false inflammatory remarks recorded but not made by Mr C. In addition Ms B says the Care Provider is falsifying documents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Care Provider investigated Ms B’s complaint and found there were failings around communication and record keeping. It accepted this had resulted in a breakdown of trust between it and Mr C and Ms B, although did not accept it met the threshold for misconduct or Ms B’s concerns about ‘toxic management’.
7. The Care Provider advised Mr C and Ms B it has taken the shortcoming identified seriously and is strengthening record keeping, improving communication, and is providing extra training and support. It apologised to Mr C and Ms B for the distress caused. We are satisfied this remedies the fault and could achieve no more than this even if we investigated.
8. While Ms B and Mr C want a full investigation into the ECF’s Management structure it is not the role of the Ombudsman to do this. We cannot investigate personnel matters or investigate the Management structure of the ECF.
9. There have been inaccuracies and omissions in record keeping and communication and the Care Provider has apologised for these. We are satisfied the additional procedures identified and implemented by the Care Provider remedies the fault.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint because we are satisfied with the actions taken by the Care Provider to remedy the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman