Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the standard of care provided to her late mother by Company Y, a Council commissioned care provider. Company Y has investigated Miss X’s concerns, upheld parts of her complaint, apologised and taken action to improve. We could not add to Company Y’s response or make a different finding of the kind Miss X wants.

The complaint

1. Miss Z has made this complaint on Miss X’s behalf to us and to Company Y. Miss Z complains about:

• the quality of care Miss X’s mother received and a fall in November 2023 which resulted in a fractured hip and hospital admission.
• Company Y’s failure to contact Miss X when her mother’s condition deteriorated on the day she died and care home staff not attending her late mother’s funeral.
• Miss X feeling intimidated and falsely accused of racism when interacting with staff at the care home.
• inconsistencies in records and complaint responses about what happened while Miss X’s mother was at the care home and when she passed away.

2. Miss Z says Miss X has been caused distress by Company Y’s actions. She wants Company Y to make a full written apology, admit the mistakes it made and for its rating with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to be downgraded.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (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.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Company Y has responded to the elements of Miss Z’s complaint listed above. It has accepted its record keeping in this case was not as robust as it should have been. It apologised to Miss X for this and explained the action it has taken or will take to improve. This has included speaking to staff members involved and wider staff briefings. Company Y explained the unsuccessful attempts it made to contact Miss X and her family when her mother’s condition deteriorated on the day she died. Company Y said it could not know what exactly took place between Miss X and a member of staff due to a lack of independent and tangible evidence.
7. Miss Z says she would like Company Y to make a full written apology. Company Y has already apologised and provided a reasonably clear explanation where possible based on the records which exist. We could not add to this or make a different finding even if we investigated and found evidence of fault. We cannot change the CQC rating for the care home as Miss Z requests. Miss X or Miss Z can ask the CQC, who is the regulator of care providers, to consider their concerns during its routine inspections.
8. Sadly, Miss X’s mother passed away at the end of last year. We could not provide a remedy for any injustice caused to her by the care provider’s actions, even if we investigated and found evidence of fault. Miss X was understandably upset at events just before and after her mother died. We could not likely say these would have been significantly different but for something Company Y might have done or not, and that its actions caused significant avoidable injustice.
9. Company Y has apologised to Miss X and advised of the actions it has taken to minimise the risk of similar issues, to improve its record keeping and improve its interactions with family and friends of residents. We could achieve no more than this.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss Z’s complaint because further investigation could not provide a different outcome to those already achieved. We could not provide Miss X’s mother with a remedy for any injustice even if we found evidence of fault because she has passed away.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman