Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about negligent adult social care. Negligence is a legal matter and not for the Ombudsman. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would add to the investigation already undertaken or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr B says the Care Provider was negligent. Mr B’s mother (Mrs C) sustained an injury while in the care home, which Mr B says resulted in her death. The Care Provider has taken action to improve service, but Mr B wants compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers and decide whether their actions have caused an injustice, or could have caused injustice, to the person making the complaint. I have used the term fault to describe such actions. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B and 34C)
3. 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

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. Mrs C lived in a care home ran by the Care Provider. Mrs C fell from her chair and suffered an injury which was causing her much pain and distress. The Care Provider told Mr B, who visited, and found it distressing seeing his mother in that condition while awaiting the ambulance.
7. The Care Provider says Mrs C had capacity to decide where to sit and chose to sit in the chair. But accepts it had not reassessed Mrs C’s ability to use the chair since she had started to show signs of anxious behaviour.
8. Mrs C has died, and Mr B says the accident resulted in her death. This is not a finding the Ombudsman could make. Cause of death is established by a medical professional or coroner.
9. Mr B says the Care Provider was negligent. This is not a finding the Ombudsman could make. Mr B could seek legal advice if he wishes to pursue a claim of negligence. The Ombudsman’s remedies are not intended to be punitive, and we do not award compensation in the way that a court might.
10. We look at the root causes of problems and recommend improvements to systems where they haven’t worked properly, so others do not suffer from these same problems in future. The Care Provider has already done this; it is unlikely that further investigation would add to this or lead to a different outcome.
11. The Ombudsman cannot remedy the distress of someone who has died, so we can provide no outcome for Mrs C.
12. The Care Provider has acknowledged witnessing Mrs C’s pain was distressing and has apologised to Mr B that he did not feel the care worker was compassionate. We understand it was upsetting for Mr B witnessing his mother’s distress, and this was compounded by Mrs C’s subsequent death. The Ombudsman can only consider remedying avoidable additional distress caused directly by the actions of the Care Provider. In this situation Mr B’s distress was caused by his mother’s injury and an Ombudsman investigation might not find the Care Provider’s actions caused the injury. The Care Provider might have assessed Mrs C could sit in the chair, and her injury may still have occurred.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. If Mr B wishes to claim compensation for negligence, that is a legal matter and not one for the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman