Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about short term residential adult social care. The care provider accepted where things went wrong, apologised, and made changes to its service. It is unlikely we would add to that investigation or reach a different outcome. We are satisfied with the actions already taken.

The complaint

1. Ms B says a care provider acting for the Council, gave poor care to her relative (Mr C) and neglected him. Mr C was at the care home for a short stay to give Ms B respite from her caring role. But Ms B did not get the needed respite as was visiting several times a day and completing care tasks and laundry. Ms B does not believe Mr C should have to pay for poor care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by someone we consider to be suitable. We have accepted Ms B as a suitable person to represent Mr C.

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

3. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

4. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council is responsible to meet Mr C’s adult social care needs and was responsible to meet Ms B’s needs as a carer. To meet these needs the Council arranged a short stay at a residential home. The care provider acts on behalf of the Council.
8. The care provider has spoken to relevant staff and reviewed care records to respond to Ms B’s complaint. It has accepted where some things went wrong, apologised to Ms B and explained actions taken to improve future service. It is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to that investigation or reach a different outcome.
9. When a council arranges care it must assess what if anything the person can afford to pay toward that care. The Council has explained to Ms B what information it needs. If the Council cannot complete the full assessment, it will assess that Mr C must pay for the full cost of his care. This is the correct process the Council must follow.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because it is unlikely we would add to the provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome. We are satisfied with the action’s already taken in response to Ms B’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman