Summary: Mrs E complained about the way the Council dealt with safeguarding concerns she raised about her late husband. She also complained the Council delayed dealing with her complaint about the matter. We find the Council was at fault for its communication with Mrs E and the way it dealt with her complaint. The Council apologised to Mrs E which is suitable to remedy the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Mrs E complained about the way the Council dealt with safeguarding concerns she raised about her late husband (Mr E). She says she had to chase the Council to discuss the safeguarding outcome and it closed the case without an adequate explanation. She also says the Council delayed responding to her complaint about the matter.
2. Mrs E says the impact the abuse had on Mr E was immense and it is distressing the Council failed to investigate it properly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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), as amended)

5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. 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

7. I considered information Mrs E submitted with her complaint. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent in response.
8. Mrs E and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

9. Councils have a duty to make safeguarding enquiries if they reasonably suspect an adult who has care or support needs is at risk of abuse or neglect and cannot protect themselves (section 42 Care Act 2014).
10. The aims of a safeguarding enquiry are to establish facts, assess the adult’s need for protection, support, and redress, and to make a decision about what follow-up action should be taken regarding the person or organisation responsible for the abuse. The main purpose of a safeguarding enquiry is to decide whether or not the council, or another organisation, should do something to help protect the adult.
11. As part of a safeguarding enquiry, councils must gather relevant information from the person who raised the safeguarding alert, the vulnerable person in question (if appropriate), professionals involved in their care, and family members. Councils should share information and liaise with those involved when making decisions and manage any potential risk. Councils must also keep accurate records of safeguarding enquiries and outcomes.
12. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance sets out what a safeguarding enquiry should look like. This could range from a conversation with the adult or their representative through to a formal multi-agency plan. The guidance says it is for the council to determine the appropriateness of the enquiry.
13. Councils are responsible for keeping the person who raised the safeguarding alert updated about any investigation and proposed actions. This can be orally or in writing.
14. A council can stop a safeguarding enquiry if it is satisfied there are no safeguarding issues, or the risk has been managed effectively.

What happened

15. Mrs E contacted the Council in March 2019 to report a safeguarding concern about Mr E. Mr E attended a day centre for people with dementia. Mrs E said she saw a member of staff from the day centre verbally abusing Mr E when he was being transported home.
16. The Council spoke to the day centre. The day centre said it had interviewed all staff members present, but there was no evidence of the incident taking place.
17. The Council spoke to Mrs E again to gather more information about the incident. Mrs E said she saw the incident from inside her home. She said she saw a heated exchange of words between Mr E and a member of staff. She said she had removed Mr E from the day centre.
18. The Council visited Mr and Mrs E at their home on 15 April. It said it had closed the case as the allegation could not be substantiated. Mrs E said she was not happy with the outcome.
19. Mrs E contacted the Council on 3 February 2020 and asked to know the outcome of the safeguarding enquiry from April 2019. The Council explained it had closed the case as there was no evidence to indicate abuse had taken place. It agreed to send her a letter detailing the outcome.
20. A manager from the Council called Mrs E the following day. The manager said there was not enough evidence to confirm the incident had occurred and therefore the matter would remain closed. Mrs E said she was unhappy with the conversation the previous day, and therefore she was considering making a complaint. The manager agreed to send her details of the Council’s complaints procedure.
21. The Council wrote to Mrs E on 20 February and gave her the details of its complaints procedure. It also said it could not determine that the abuse had occurred. Mrs E says she did not receive this letter.
22. Mrs E contacted the Council on 3 March, 12 June, and 29 July for an update on her complaint.
23. Mrs E emailed the Council on 8 November and said she had been chasing it consistently for a response. She said she had sent emails to its complaints department in March 2020 but had not received any response.
24. The Council emailed Mrs E the following day and said her complaint was out of time because it had addressed the issue previously. Mrs E responded and said her complaint was only out of time because the Council had failed to respond.
25. The Council spoke to Mrs E on 19 November about her complaint. It agreed to send her a letter as a summary of the discussion.
26. The Council wrote to Mrs E as agreed on 24 December. It accepted that its letter from 20 February did not fully address her concerns or fully explain how it had come to its conclusion. It also accepted that her subsequent correspondence with the safeguarding team should have been better. It apologised for the poor level of service. It said Mrs E’s verbal account of the incident was considered by the investigating officer, but there was no information to verify that any abuse had occurred.
27. Mrs E remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response to her complaint and referred the matter to the Ombudsman.
28. Mr E sadly died in April 2021.

Back to top

Analysis

29. The Ombudsman cannot investigate late complaints unless there are good reasons to do so. A late complaint is when someone takes more than 12 months to complaint to us about something a council has done. Mrs E became aware of some of the issues she complained about in April 2019. She did not refer her complaint to the Ombudsman until January 2021. I will exercise direction to investigate the Council’s actions from March 2019. This is because Mrs E did attempt to pursue matters in February/March 2020, but there were significant delays in the Council dealing with her complaint.
30. I do not find fault with the Council’s investigation of Mrs E’s safeguarding concerns. It gathered information from the day centre and spoke to Mrs E to understand more about her concerns. The day centre said it had interviewed its staff, but there was no evidence of the incident taking place. Mrs E said she witnessed the incident from her window. However, she could provide no other evidence. The Council closed the case because there was no evidence to verify the abuse had taken place. This was a decision it was entitled to make based on the information it had received.
31. I do find fault with the Council’s communication with Mrs E and the way it dealt with her complaint. Its letter of 20 February 2020 was brief and did not fully explain the outcome of the safeguarding enquiry. Although Mrs E had been told the outcome of the safeguarding enquiry in April 2019, she clearly wanted to understand further why the matter was closed. The Council’s letter did not appropriately address this.
32. There were also significant delays dealing with Mrs E’s complaint. Mrs E contacted various members of staff over an extended period. When the Council did eventually respond to her, it said her complaint was out of time. This was incorrect as the Council had failed to consider its own delays in dealing with her correspondence.
33. When the Council responded to Mrs E’s complaint, it apologised for its letter of 20 February 2020 and its subsequent communication with her. I consider this to be a fair and reasonable remedy for the frustration caused to Mrs E. Therefore, I do not recommend anything further.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council, which caused an injustice to Mrs E. The Council has taken action to remedy that injustice and so I do not recommend anything further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman