Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Care Provider losing Mr Y’s false teeth. The courts are best placed to deal with claims for costs of replacing lost or damaged possessions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Care Provider lost his father’s (Mr Y’s) false teeth. He says this has caused Mr Y a financial detriment due to buying a replacement set, and impacted his dignity. Mr X wants the Care Provider to compensate them for the financial loss, apologise and make service improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr Y was admitted to hospital in early 2023 from the care home where he lived. Mr X says despite requests for his father’s false teeth, the Care Provider did not provide them. He says the Care Provider said they were mislaid during a change of rooms at the care home.
6. Claims for lost possessions are best considered by the small claims court. While the courts are unlikely to be able to order the Care Provider apologises and makes service improvements, the substantive issue is the financial impact on
   Mr Y. There is not a good reason for us to consider the matter instead.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the courts are best placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman