Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council failing to fully investigate safeguarding concerns about a relative. This is because the injustice is not sufficient to warrant an investigation, and we would not achieve significantly more than the Council has already suggested.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to safeguard her late relative, which she believes resulted in the relative suffering abuse up until their death.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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:

• any injustice is not significant enough 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X told the Council her safeguarding concerns whilst her relative was alive. The Council accepts it failed to speak to Mrs X and another family member as it should have done to fully understand their concerns.
7. The Council said the relative had mental capacity to understand the safeguarding concerns but did not want any action to be taken. In such circumstances, the Council cannot take safeguarding action.
8. Sadly, the relative has since died.
9. If the Council had spoken with Mrs X and the family member about their concerns, it may or may not have affected what the Council thought it should do about safeguarding the relative. The relative had mental capacity, so we cannot know if they would have consented to the Council taking any different steps than it did.
10. The Council said it will use the learning from this case to improve its safeguarding training. An investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to achieve more than this.
11. Mrs X also wants a thorough investigation by the Council now. I understand why Mrs X wants this. However, it would be disproportionate for us to seek this in respect of someone who has died, where there is no action the Council can now take.
12. We recognise that the Council not speaking to Mrs X and the family member about their concerns has caused uncertainty and the sense of a missed opportunity, which is distressing for Mrs X. However, the injustice is not sufficient to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the injustice is not sufficient to warrant an investigation, and we would not achieve significantly more than the Council has already committed to doing.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman