Safeguarding

North East Lincolnshire Council (19 004 233)

Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 24-Dec-2019

Summary: The complaint is about care arrangements for Mr and Mrs B when Mrs B went home from hospital after a fall. There was no fault in the Council's discharge planning which was in line with the Care Act 2014 and Mental Capacity Act 205. And, there is no evidence Mrs B's care arrangements caused Mr B's health to decline or led to his admission into care. So we do not uphold this complaint.

Westminster City Council (19 009 583)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 17-Dec-2019

Summary: We uphold Mr D's complaints. The Council failed to act in line with sections 194 and188 of the Housing Act 1996 and with sections 9 and 42 of the Care Act 2014 when dealing with Mr D. The Council also failed to consider the need to make reasonable adjustments to its services. This was fault and caused avoidable Mr D anxiety. To remedy the injustice, the Council has agreed to: take a homeless application, consider whether it needs to provide interim accommodation, carry out a social care assessment and establish whether there is any current risk of abuse to Mr D in Westminster before agreeing with him whether he wishes to be referred to another area's safeguarding adults team or to the police. Mr D will need to attend the Council's offices for appointments with housing and social care staff and he will need to sign consent forms.

Southampton City Council (19 000 595)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 17-Dec-2019

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council's care provider, Cygnet Care Services Ltd, failed to care properly for her son, resulting in him suffering severe constipation and losing a lot of weight. There were failings to communicate properly with Mrs X and a GP about her son's health, which prevented a holistic approach being taken. The Council needs to apologise and take action to prevent similar problems from happening again.

Trafford Council (19 003 957)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 03-Dec-2019

Summary: Mr & Mrs C complain about matters relating to a safeguarding investigation that the Council carried out after Mrs C's mother received an oxygen overdose at a care home. There was fault in how the Council responded the Mr & Mrs C's complaint, and it has agreed to a suitable remedy.

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (18 018 612)

Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 15-Nov-2019

Summary: Ms X complains that a social worker unjustly accused Mr Y of making threats to kill a manager and this impacted his support and treatment. The Ombudsman finds no fault in the Council's actions.

East Sussex County Council (19 000 804)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 13-Nov-2019

Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council conducted a safeguarding adults investigation after allegations were made that involved him and his wife. He says it took too long and led to the couple losing income unnecessarily. The Council accepts there were faults in the investigation and that it took too long. This caused the couple distress for longer than necessary, for which the Council will pay them £500 as well as the actions it agreed before the complaint reached us. However, it is not possible to say Mr and Mrs X lost income during the investigation. This is because they resigned from the scheme under which they provided accommodation a few weeks after the safeguarding investigation started.

City of York Council (18 019 945)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 08-Nov-2019

Summary: Mrs B complains on behalf of Mrs C that the Council did not properly manage a personal assistant it employed for Mrs C or properly conduct financial assessments in relation to Mrs C. The Council was at fault in the way the personal assistant service was managed after it took responsibility for it. Mrs C lost money as a result. The Council should review its procedures to ensure it properly documents and reviews services.

Luton Borough Council (18 016 910)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 06-Nov-2019

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to deal properly with safeguarding concerns involving his mother in November 2018, causing them both much distress. The Council failed to deal with the concerns under its safeguarding policies or procedures, or take account of its duties under the Equalities Act 2010 and Mental Capacity Act 2015. It needs to apologise for the avoidable distress caused, pay financial redress and take action to ensure it deals properly with such matters in the future.

Gloucestershire County Council (19 002 938)

Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 04-Nov-2019

Summary: Miss N complained the Council failed to fully investigate safeguarding concerns about her grandfather, Mr G. She said Mr G was at risk of physical, emotional and financial abuse, from his son, Mr S. The Council was not at fault.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (18 017 799)

Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 31-Oct-2019

Summary: There is no evidence the outcome of the safeguarding investigation into Mrs X's fall was materially different without the evidence of one particular carer, as Mr A suggests. The Council has already apologised for some delay and taken action to ensure the care provider improves its practices.