Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care provided to Mrs Y in a care home. The Council has accepted it was at fault and agreed to pay the complainants a suitable financial remedy.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained about the care provided to his wife, Mrs Y, leading up to her death. Mr Y says Mrs Y was not treated promptly when she had COVID-19 and she was not moved to the home’s nursing unit. Mr Y says the event has caused significant distress for the family. He says the Care Provider then did not effectively deal with his complaint, and he went to significant time and trouble in chasing responses. Mr Y wants steps to be taken to ensure care staff have the necessary qualifications and experience. He also wants to be paid a financial remedy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs Y lived in a care home, commissioned by the Council. Mr Y’s complaint is about the Care Provider’s actions in the lead up to Mrs Y’s death.
7. If we were to investigate the complaint, it is likely we would find fault causing Mr Y and his daughter, Ms X, injustice. The Care Provider acknowledged appropriate actions were not taken when Mrs Y was deteriorating, and it did not effectively communicate with the family.
8. We could not say that Mrs Y’s death was caused by the Care Provider. We also could not remedy injustice to a person who had died. The injustice I must consider is that experienced by Mr Y and Ms X. If we investigated this complaint, it is likely we would decide they experienced avoidable distress, uncertainty about how Mrs Y’s prognosis would have differed had treatment been sought sooner, inconvenience in chasing complaint responses, and lost opportunity to be involved in making decisions at the end of Mrs Y’s life or to be with her when she passed.
9. The Care Provider has made suitable service improvements as a result of its learning. The Care Provider has made effective apologies during the complaints process. However, as the complainants cannot be put back in the position they would have been but for fault, I asked the Council to also agree to pay them a financial remedy.
10. When we recommend a payment, it is often a modest, symbolic amount as opposed to ‘compensation’ in the same way as the courts. I considered the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies when suggesting an appropriate figure to the Council, and I am satisfied that this remedies the outstanding injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

11. When a council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them. So, although the complaint was about the Care Provider, it is the Council that will provide a remedy.
12. The Council has agreed to pay £250 each to Mr Y and Ms X, within one month of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because the Council has agreed to take suitable action to remedy the outstanding injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman