Surrey County Council (24 006 533)
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult safeguarding. The Council has accepted fault and will apologise and act to improve future service. We are satisfied with the Council’s actions in response to the complaint. It is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome.
The complaint
- Mr B says the Council made three inconclusive efforts to investigate safeguarding of his relative Mr C who has since died. Mr B wants the Council to apologise to Mr C’s wife and to improve procedures.
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:
- we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
- further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
- If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended.
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- The Council is the local safeguarding authority. It is responsible to protect adults living in its area who have care and support needs, from abuse and neglect.
- The Council received a safeguarding alert about Mr C during his lifetime. The Council accepts fault in its investigation process, leading to a wrong finding there was no abuse or neglect of Mr C. The Council reinvestigated, including information from Mr B, and found Mr C was at risk of abuse and neglect and put in place an action plan. Because of the early error this outcome took longer than it should have.
- The Council has thoroughly responded to Mr B’s complaint, accepted where it went wrong, and explained what it will do to prevent future failings. The Council also said it would apologise to Mr C’s wife for the delay reaching the correct outcome and the associated distress.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is unlikely we would add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome. The Council has accepted fault and taken action in response. We are satisfied with the Council’s actions in response to the complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman