Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about safeguarding a vulnerable adult because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement. We could not achieve a remedy for the person affected because they have died, and the injustice to their representative is not sufficient to warrant our involvement. The representative has a more appropriate route to obtain information from the Council about the data it holds. The complaint is a late complaint as the representative knew about the issues more than 12 months ago.

The complaint

1. Mrs B says the Council failed to respond and investigate her concerns about her mother’s (Mrs C’s) care. Mrs B says if the Council had intervened then Mrs C would not have developed pressure sores which led to her death. Mrs B feels stressed and let down by the Council who she trusted to care for her mother. Mrs B wants evidence of the telephone calls the Council says it made to her in December 2020, and for the Council to take allegations of neglect and abuse seriously when it receives them.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. Where someone has died, we will not normally seek a remedy for injustice caused to that person in the same way as we might for someone who is still living. We would not expect a public or private body to make a payment to someone’s estate. Therefore, if the impact of a fault was on someone who has died, we will not recommend an organisation make a payment in recognition of, for example, the impact of poor care that person might have received while they were alive. This is because the person who received the poor care cannot benefit from such a payment. However, if we consider the person who has complained to us has been adversely affected by seeing the impact of that poor care on their relative, we may recommend remedy for their own distress.
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs C lived with her son, Mr X. In September 2020 Mrs B first started raising concerns about Mrs C’s welfare, because Mr X would not allow her any contact.
8. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect. An enquiry could range from a conversation with the person who is the subject of the concern, to a more formal multi-agency arrangement. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse. (section 42, Care Act 2014)
9. The Council completed safeguarding enquiries and had no concerns about Mrs C’s welfare. The Council consulted professionals involved in Mrs C’s care, including the care provider, the GP, a Nurse and a physiotherapist. None of these professionals had any concerns regarding neglect or abuse.
10. Mrs C went to hospital with severe pressure sores, which Mrs B believes evidence of a failure in care support. The Council says the hospital did not raise a safeguarding concern about the care prior to the hospital admission, and that pressure sores can develop very rapidly.
11. There is no evidence of fault to warrant an Ombudsman investigation. In addition, we could provide no remedy to Mrs C who would be the person who had the most significant injustice caused by any failures in care support.
12. I understand it would be an upsetting time for Mrs B, but the Ombudsman could never conclude the Council’s actions led to or contributed to Mrs C’s death. It is for a coroner to conclude cause of death. It would not be a justified use of the Ombudsman’s resource to obtain evidence of telephone calls the Council says it made or copies of its records. Mrs B may be able to obtain the documents she requires by way of a request under the Data Protection Act or Freedom of Information Act. If Mrs B is unhappy with the way the Council deals with such requests, she can take those concerns to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
13. In addition to these reasons for not investigating, Mrs B’s complaint is also a late complaint. Mrs B knew about her concerns in April/May 2021 and has taken over 12 months to raise these concerns with the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. We could not achieve a remedy for Mrs C because she has died. The injustice to Mrs B is not sufficient to warrant our involvement. Mrs B wants information from the Council about how it acted on her concerns, she has a more appropriate route to obtain information from the Council about the data it holds. The complaint is a late complaint as Mrs B knew about the issues more than 12 months ago.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman