Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the way the Council responded to her safeguarding concerns about her relative. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code. We are unlikely to find evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. In summary, Mrs X complains about the way the Council handled her safeguarding alerts concerning her relative.
2. Mrs X says her relative passed away in hospital while under the control of their partner and this has devastated her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended).
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant which includes the Council’s response.
6. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

7. 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)
8. The Council’s complaint response says it spoke to Mrs X’s relative who did not want information shared with her. It also says no concerns were raised by any other professionals who had contact with her relative including the Police. In short, it found no evidence to substantiate Mrs X’s concerns.
9. I have seen records showing the Council diligently kept records of Mrs X’s regular calls advising that she was not in contact with her relative and wanted to be. It also recorded her comments that she feared the relative in question and that the relative had sent her abusive letters on occasion. I note the Council explicitly informed Mrs X that the purpose of the safeguarding unit was not to provide Mrs X with a reconciliation service.
10. I appreciate Mrs X is convinced that her relative was under the control over their partner. There is no evidence to suggest Mrs X’s concerns met safeguarding thresholds for action. Disagreement with a Council decision is not necessarily evidence of fault. So, we will not investigate as we are unlikely to find evidence of fault.
11. Mrs X refers to a hospital making a safeguarding referral and says this supports her views. The Council’s response does not cover this point, so I am unable to take this into account. We can only look at complaint elements that have been addressed by the Council first. Mrs X may wish to raise this with the Council if this represents new information.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman