Safeguarding

Westminster City Council (19 003 404)

Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 14-Oct-2019

Summary: The Council acted in line with sections 42 and 9 of the Care Act 2014 when responding to Ms A's concerns of abuse of her late mother by an informal carer and so there was no fault.

Manchester City Council (18 016 997)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 19-Sep-2019

Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to deal properly with her and her parents when safeguarding concerns were raised and she asked for help in November 2018. The Council delayed in contacting Mrs Y about the safeguarding concerns and delayed in reassessing her needs. This resulted in her paying too much for her care and caused unnecessary distress to her and her daughter. The Council needs to apologies, pay financial redress and take action to prevent similar problems from happening.

Buckinghamshire County Council (18 005 323)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 04-Sep-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen found faults in safeguarding Mrs D's mother Mrs F, assessing Mrs F and her husband, and in responding to Mrs D's complaint. The Council and Trust have already accepted there were faults and apologised. This is an appropriate way to address the injustice to Mrs D's family. The Council and Trust have also improved services since Mrs D's complaint. Some of their process and information remain flawed, so we have recommended service improvements. The Council and Trust accept our recommendations, so the Ombudsmen have completed their investigation.

North Somerset Council (17 015 066)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 04-Sep-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen found North Somerset Council's flawed safeguarding enquiry into Mrs D's care and support caused Mrs C distress and uncertainty. St George's Nursing Home's (the Home) poor record keeping of Mrs D's fluid intake and pressure sore care caused Mrs C uncertainty. The Home should remedy the distress Mrs C suffered when she found an antibiotic next to Mrs D's bed. The Ombudsmen also found Bristol, North Somerset & South Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group compounded Mrs C's distress by significantly delaying handling her complaint.

London Borough of Hackney (19 000 040)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 03-Sep-2019

Summary: Ms X says the Council's response to safeguarding concerns she raised about her daughter was inadequate. There was fault by the Council because it did not properly respond to Ms X's reports. The Council agreed to review the actions of its social workers and provide a financial remedy to Ms X to reflect the uncertainty about the outcome.

North Yorkshire County Council (18 015 702)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 29-Aug-2019

Summary: The Council failed to properly consider whether it should carry out a safeguarding investigation into the actions of an elderly couple's carers. The Ombudsman recommends that the Council apologises and pays the family £650.

Lancashire County Council (18 017 385)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 19-Aug-2019

Summary: There were procedural faults by a care home during the complainant's stay, in a placement commissioned by the Council. The Council undertook a safeguarding investigation which highlighted this, and worked with the care home to make several improvements. However, these faults did not cause an injustice to the complainant.

London Borough of Tower Hamlets (18 019 424)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 15-Aug-2019

Summary: We uphold Mrs A's complaint about poor wound care for her late father Mr B. The Council will apologise and pay Mrs A £1000 to recognise her avoidable distress.

Bristol City Council (18 017 616)

Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 12-Aug-2019

Summary: Mrs B says the Council failed to take action when a care worker shared her sister's bed. There is no evidence of fault in the safeguarding investigation or in the conclusions reached following that safeguarding investigation.

London Borough of Bromley (17 019 605)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 12-Aug-2019

Summary: Ms C complains about the process through which the Council carried out a safeguarding investigation into the concerns she had raised about her grandmother's care. She did not complain about the outcome. The Ombudsman found fault with the way in which the Council carried out the investigation, which resulted in some delays and in distress to Ms C. The Council has already apologised for this and has agreed to share the lessons learned with relevant staff.