Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care received by the late Mr X in a nursing home, and a dispute about charges, as doing so would not lead to a worthwhile outcome. We could not now propose a remedy for any injustice to Mr X, and we would not be able to make recommendations regarding his estate. The Care Quality Commission has also already identified concerns within the home that require improvement, so investigation by us would not add to that.

The complaint

1. Mrs Z said the care her late father, Mr X received in a nursing home run by the provider fell significantly short of the standard one would expect. She said there was no contract, care plan, or fee structure provided on admission. She said there was no working television available throughout her father’s stay and his property weas stolen. She also said he was left dirty and his nutritional and medical needs were sometimes not met, worsening his health. She complained the provider did not deal properly with her complaint, and ignored some of the matters complained of. She said the provider has ignored her offer of £15,000 to settle the matter.

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) and 34C(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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. I note the care provider accepted some failings in the care of Mr X. However, Mrs Z said the failings were far more extensive. I note the Care Quality Commission (CQC) issued a warning to the nursing home in January 2025. I also note the CQC carried out an inspection in June 2025, which found the home required improvement in ensuring the safety of residents. It referred to some of the same points Mrs Z referenced.
7. Due to Mr X’s death, it would not be possible for us to propose remedy for any injustice he may have suffered as the result of fault by the nursing home, either personally or in the settlement of his estate. I acknowledge this is likely to be frustrating for Mrs Z.
8. We are able to make recommendations in the public interest about improvements to care in general if we consider other residents of a home may have been affected. However, in this case the CQC has recently carried out its own inspection and made recommendations that affect all residents. This means an investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome from that already achieved via the CQC.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs Z’s complaint because Mr X’s passing and the involvement of the CQC mean doing so would be unlikely to lead to a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman