Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care in a care home. The injustice to the complainant is not significant enough to justify our involvement and we cannot achieve the outcome they want. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider access to information.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the care provider acting for the Council failed to tell her key decisions about her relative’s care, despite her formal appointment for health and welfare. Ms B says the care provider lied about telephone calls it claimed it made to her. This caused unnecessary stress and anxiety. Ms B wants to see evidence of the telephone calls and believes the care home needs a new management team.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2), as amended)

3. We have accepted Ms B as a suitable person.
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms B’s relative, Ms C, lived at a care home. The Council arranged Ms C’s placement to meet her adult social care needs. The care provider who run the care home act on behalf of the Council.
8. Ms B says the care provider was failing to adequately meet Ms C’s care and support needs. Ms C has since died and so the Ombudsman can provide her with no remedy for the impact of any poor care.
9. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
10. Although Ms B says she was stressed by poor communication, this would not justify the Ombudsman’s resource to investigate. The issues are no longer continuing. We also cannot achieve the outcome Ms B wants about staff changes, as we have no powers on personnel issues.
11. Ms B says the care provider lied about telephone calls it made and will not release any evidence to her because of data rights. Ms B argues this is her data not Ms C’s. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider concerns about data rights and access to information.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because Ms B’s injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, and we cannot achieve the outcomes Ms B wants. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider concerns about data rights and access to information.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman