Summary: We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint, made on behalf of Mr X, about the care provider’s decision to require him to move rooms at short notice, how it explained the decision, not assessing the possible impacts on Mr X beforehand, and how it dealt with her complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the care provider’s decision to move Mr X to warrant investigating. The impacts of the decision on him and how it was done do not amount to a significant personal injustice which justifies an investigation. We do not investigate providers’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the issues giving rise to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X used to live in a care home run by the care provider. His daughter Ms Y complains the care provider:
1. decided to move Mr X to a different room at short notice;
2. did not explain the decision;
3. failed to consider the possible impacts on Mr X before making the decision;
4. failed to properly investigate and respond to her complaint.
2. Ms Y says the matter caused Mr X anger and upset. She says he feels he was not treated fairly, respected, properly consulted or listened to by the home’s staff.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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 the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Ms Y and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The care provider says it was entitled, under the terms and conditions of Mr X’s stay at the home, to decide to move him to a different room. It has quoted the relevant clause. We realise Ms Y considers the decision should have been made differently. But there is not enough evidence of fault in the care provider’s core decision to move Mr X to a new room to warrant an investigation. Should Mr X or Ms Y believe the care provider breached the contract, this would be a private civil matter between the signatories to that contract.
7. We recognise Mr X was angered and upset, felt disrespected and unfairly treated by the care provider’s decision to move him to a different room at very short notice, and by how it dealt with the matter more broadly. He moved to a different care home about a month later. But the impacts of the care provider’s decision on him and how it was done were short-lived and do not amount to such a significant personal injustice to justify us investigating.
8. Ms Y considers the care provider did not properly respond to or investigate her complaint. We do not investigate providers’ complaint-handling in isolation where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate the complaint because:
• there is not enough evidence of fault in the care provider’s decision to move Mr X to a different room to warrant us investigating; and
• the care provider moving Mr X to a different room or how it did so did not cause him such significant personal injustice to justify an investigation; and
• we do not investigate providers’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman