Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Care Home failing to manage his wife’s risk of falls. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome he wants. There is another body better placed to consider his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Care Home failed to manage his wife, Mrs X’s, risk of falls during her respite placement. He said as a result, his wife fell which caused her injury. It caused Mr X distress. He wants the Care Provider to provide a financial remedy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Care Provider.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X had a short stay at the Care Home for respite care. Mrs X’s health conditions affect her mobility. She requires measures to be put in place to manage her risk of falls.
6. On the first night, Mr X said Mrs X had fallen out of bed. The paramedics attended to Mrs X at the Care Home and completed observations. At the time, Mrs X did not require a hospital admission. The paramedics provided advice to the Care Home to manage Mrs X’s condition. Mrs X continued her placement at the Care Home.
7. Following Mrs X’s stay at the Care Home, Mr X complained to the Care Provider. He said:
• Mrs X had fallen from her bed due to staff failing to implement a sensor mat in her bed. Although the Care Home had accepted fault and apologised to Mr X, it was not enough for the injustice which had been caused to him as well as to Mrs X. He said the injury had poorly affected Mrs X’s behaviour and he was not aware until after discharge the extent of bruising on Mrs X’s leg. Mr X said he spent the remainder of Mrs X’s respite care worrying about her; and
• the fall had caused Mrs X to spend several weeks in hospital following her discharge from the Care Home. Mrs X now required more support than before. Mr X wanted the Care Provider to refund the total amount of fees they paid for the respite care which was approximately £3,600. He also wanted the Care Provider to pay compensation to cover costs such as those associated with Mrs X needing extra care in her home.
8. The Care Provider offered Mr X £2000 for the injustice caused however, he declined this. In his complaint to us, Mr X said he wanted to continue to pursue the Care Provider for compensation.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the Care Provider has already apologised to Mr and Mrs X and offered a financial remedy which is more than what we would recommend. Mr X wants the Care Provider to pay him compensation. We do not award compensation for claims of negligence. Such matters are dealt with appropriately by the courts. It would therefore be reasonable for Mr X to pursue the matter via the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman