Trafford Council (23 018 281)
Category : Adult care services > Safeguarding
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 17 Apr 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult safeguarding. There is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice. We cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants for the Council to confirm there was no finding of abuse or neglect, because the safeguarding investigation is continuing.
The complaint
- Ms B says the Council has been unprofessional in its handling of a safeguarding concern about her father, Mr C. Ms B says the Council:
- Recorded a meeting without telling them.
- Was texting the person who made the accusations during the meeting.
- Met Mr C previously without Ms B knowing.
- Asked inappropriate questions, including questioning and looking at Mr C’s Will.
- Has failed to provide a follow up after the meeting.
- Ms B says the accusations are unfounded and has caused anxiety and depression. Ms B and Mr C fear what will happen next, and whether they may be separated. Ms B wants the Council to:
- admit it was dishonest in arranging the first meeting without Ms B’s knowledge or presence;
- admit it was wrong to look at Mr C’s Will; and
- to confirm its investigation is complete.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:
- there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
- any fault has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained 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
- we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- The aims of adult safeguarding are to prevent harm and reduce the risk of abuse or neglect to adults with care and support needs. The Council received concerns about potential abuse of Mr C, so has a duty to investigate that even though it causes stress and anxiety to Mr C and Ms B.
- The Council first met Mr C without Ms B present and without her knowledge. There was no requirement for the Council to involve Ms B. The Council checked that nobody has a power of attorney for Mr C’s finances or health and welfare, so there is nobody officially appointed to represent him in these areas. Under the Mental Capacity Act, you are presumed to have capacity unless there is a reason to consider otherwise. So, it was appropriate for the Council to speak directly with Mr C unless he asked otherwise, and there was no requirement for the Council to tell or involve Ms B.
- The Council then met Mr C again, this time with Ms B present. Ms B says the Council recorded the meeting; the Council denies this. There is not enough evidence for the Ombudsman to find the Council covertly recorded the meeting. Even if the Council did record it, I do not find that causes a significant injustice that would warrant further investigation. Ms B knew the Council was recording the meeting in the form of taking notes which it would hold on Mr C’s record.
- Ms B says the Council was texting the person who made the allegations, X, during the meeting. The Council says X messaged the officer and asked if they could attend the meeting. The officer asked Mr C if he would consent to this, and Mr C said no. I do not find the officer’s actions caused a significant injustice that would warrant further investigation.
- It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault with the Council asking questions about Mr C’s Will, or looking at it, given it was investigating allegations of financial abuse. There is a dispute between the Council and Ms B about what was asked and in what context, which the Ombudsman will not be able to resolve as it is one person’s word against another.
- Ms B says the Council has provided no follow up after the meeting. The Council says the investigation is ongoing and so it cannot yet send any acknowledgement of its findings.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice to justify our further involvement. I understand it is stressful when accusations are made, but it is not fault of the Council to investigate concerns of abuse or neglect. The injustice in this case is primarily caused by the accusations themselves rather than the Council’s actions. It is important to protect vulnerable adults, and the Council has a duty to do so, no matter how that might impact those involved. We cannot achieve the outcomes Ms B wants because the safeguarding investigation is continuing. The Council should confirm the conclusion of the matter once complete.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman