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.

The complaint

1. 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.
2. Miss N believes the Council should apply to the Court of Protection for a deputyship, to protect Mr G from financial abuse.
3. Miss N also complained the Council wrote her a letter where it incorrectly accused her of having contact with her grandfather about his finances, causing him upset. Miss N said those accusations were false.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Miss N about her complaint and considered the Council’s response.
7. I made enquiries of the Council and read Mr G’s case records.
8. Miss N and the Council both had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Adult Safeguarding

9. Under Section 42 of the Care Act 2014, a council must make necessary enquiries if it has reason to think a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and that person has needs for care and support which mean he or she cannot protect himself or herself. It must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse or risk.
10. All referrals made to the Council are dealt with by the Safeguarding Adults Team’s Screening and Triage Service. The Safeguarding Team addresses any immediate safety needs. It then gathers further information about the referral and decides whether to progress the referral to Section 42 safeguarding enquiries or whether alternative action or advice is needed.

What happened

11. Mr G has dementia. He lives on his own at home but is supported by his son Mr S. Miss N is Mr G’s granddaughter and Mr S’s niece.
12. In February 2019, Mr G contacted the Police saying he believed his son had stolen his money. The Police contacted the Council’s Safeguarding Team who, following information gathering, decided to progress the referral for safeguarding enquiries because of Mr G’s potential vulnerability.
13. As part of the enquiries, the Council:
• Completed a home visit to Mr G;
• Arranged for the Community Mental Health Team to visit Mr G;
• Spoke to the Police, who also completed a visit to Mr G;
• Met with Mr S to talk about the concerns;
• Reviewed all Mr G’s finances.
14. The Council found no evidence that Mr S had stolen Mr G’s money. It found Mr S made sure all Mr G’s bills were paid and that there were no unusual withdrawals or transactions in his account. The Council closed the safeguarding enquiry.
15. As part of its enquiries, the Council became concerned that potential telephone contact between Miss N and Mr G was causing him anxiety about his money.
16. The Council wrote to Miss N and said it was aware from his phone bills, she spoke to her grandfather regularly. The Council asked Miss N to “consider the context of conversations held with [Mr G] surrounding his finances” as these caused him much stress and anxiety.
17. Miss N wrote to the Council and said she had not spoken to her grandfather for over a year, but that he did leave her answer phone messages. She was unhappy the Council had failed to contact her before writing the letter and said its allegations were false. She questioned the Council’s assessment that Mr S was suitable to care for her grandfather. She referred to previous safeguarding concerns raised about Mr S and that a potential for further physical, emotional and psychological abuse remained. She said the Council should have gone to the Court of Protection to get a deputyship for Mr G.
18. The Council responded to Miss N’s complaint and apologised if the information in the previous letter was incorrect or open to interpretation. It acknowledged the information was based on information from Mr G who had a diagnosis of dementia. It apologised to Miss N for not speaking to her before sending the letter. It said it did not have concerns about Mr S caring for Mr G. It said it did not believe Mr G needed a deputyship but would consider that in the future if needed.
19. Miss N remained unhappy with the Council’s response and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

20. It is not for the Ombudsman to reinvestigate the safeguarding referral but to consider whether the Council conducted a suitable investigation in line with its safeguarding procedures.
21. The Council screened the initial referral and decided to complete safeguarding enquiries. The Council visited Mr G and spoke to other agencies supporting him. It also completed a thorough assessment of his finances. Although the referral was for financial abuse, the case records demonstrate the Council considered Mr G’s wider wellbeing as part of its enquiries. There was no fault in how the Council carried out its enquiries.
22. The Council did not identify any current safeguarding concerns and therefore it did not apply for a deputyship. The Council was not at fault.
23. Miss N was unhappy about the content of the letter sent to her by the Council. The Council based the letter on information it gathered during its enquiries. It accepts the letter was incorrect. It has apologised to Miss N and accepted it should have spoken to her before sending the letter. A copy of that apology is on file. The Council has therefore already remedied the injustice caused to Miss N by the letter and so I will not investigate this issue further.

Back to top

Final decision

24. The Council was not at fault in how it considered safeguarding concerns about Mr G, therefore I have completed my investigation

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman