Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to safeguarding concerns about Mrs X’s mother. The Council investigated the concerns and took appropriate action. It has apologised for not having communicated the outcome with Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council did not investigate concerns about her mother’s (Mrs Y’s) power of attorney, who she says did not act appropriately in their role. She says this caused her great anxiety and impacted on her mother’s health. She wants the attorney to be removed from their role.

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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X raised a safeguarding concern in October 2022, relating to her mother’s (Mrs Y’s) attorney. She complained to us that the Council did not investigate her concerns.
6. The Council provided evidence to me of its investigation of those concerns. It made appropriate enquiries and took appropriate action relating to risks it identified. It satisfied itself that the issues of concern had not harmed Mrs Y’s health. I am satisfied the Council investigated Mrs X’s concerns properly and there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant investigation by the Ombudsman.
7. The Council recognised during its complaints process that it did not communicate the outcome of its investigation to Mrs X, which it accepts it should have. It apologised to her for this, and this is sufficient to recognise Mrs X’s anxiety. This did not change the ultimate outcome relating to Mrs Y’s wellbeing.
8. Further investigation by us would not achieve a different outcome. We cannot remove an attorney, and the Office of the Public Guardian and the Court of Protection have appropriately been involved. It is for the court, not the Council or the Ombudsman, to decide whether an attorney should be removed.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman