Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care and risks to a vulnerable adult. The adult has died so we can provide him no remedy. The way the Council treated the family does not justify an investigation when there is no worthwhile outcome to achieve.

The complaint

1. Ms D says the Council failed to properly consider her concerns about Mr E’s care and support, and that he was at risk of coercion and control. Ms D says the Council wrongly excluded she and her children from Mr E and decisions about his care support. Ms D says the Council failed to properly deal with her complaint. Ms D and her family are traumatised by events, and it has impacted their mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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, 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 no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints and those where we can achieve a worthwhile outcome.
6. Ms D was Mr E’s partner. When Mr E became ill Ms D had no formal standing, such as a power of attorney or deputyship. One of Mr E’s daughters got power of attorney. This restricted what information the Council could share with Ms D, both in Mr E’s lifetime and after his death. The Council also says Mr E said he did not want Ms D involved in his affairs and that he had capacity to decide that.
7. Ms D could raise concerns with the Office of the Public Guardian about how the daughter got the power of attorney, and about any concerns in how that person was acting as an attorney. Ms D says she did this.
8. Ms D is unhappy with the way the Council treated her. The Council has responded to Ms D’s complaints based on what is in its records and has not found evidence to support that its staff did not act properly. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation could add to this. Where it is one person’s word against another, we will rely on the records taken. If there is no evidence, we may be unable to make a finding and reach a worthwhile outcome.
9. Ms D says she also raised concerns with the Council under its role to safeguard Mr E from neglect or abuse. The Council explains the actions it took and has apologised for any delays. As Mr E has since died, he no longer needs safeguarding, and we could provide him with no remedy for any impact any delay had on him. There is not a worthwhile outcome for the Ombudsman to achieve from an investigation.
10. Ms D is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms D’s complaint because it is unlikely we would add to the Council’s investigation. I appreciate how distressing this has been for Ms D and her family. But much of that distress is caused by the situation rather than solely by the Council’s actions. It does not justify an Ombudsman investigation where we cannot achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman