Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. The Council has completed a thorough investigation, accepted fault, apologised and will train staff in relevant areas. It is unlikely we would add to this or achieve anything further. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council failed to take minutes of a meeting or ask for her minutes. The Council could not properly answer her concerns and would not accept fault over what was discussed. Ms B says the Council failed to properly respond to a freedom of information request. Ms B says she has hardly any information about her relative’s (Mr C’s) death, and she feels cheated and unable to grieve. Ms B wants information about the days and circumstances leading up to Mr C’s death.

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:

• 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or

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

3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr C was an adult living in a care home. Mr C did not have mental capacity to decide about his care and support, or his finances, and so another relative was his attorney and could make decisions on his behalf. Mr C has since died.
7. The Council’s safeguarding team became involved when the attorney banned Ms B from visiting Mr C. Ms B says the Council did not properly explain its involvement. Ms B’s account of what was discussed differs from the Council’s and the Council kept no minutes of the meeting. However, this does not cause a significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation.
8. The attorney decided to move Mr C to another care home; Mr C died shortly after. Ms B was not told about the move or about Mr C’s death. The Council says although the attorney’s powers died with Mr C, it will not share information with Ms B as believes it holds a duty of confidence to Mr C.
9. The Council has completed a thorough investigation and responded to Ms B’s concerns. The Council accepts fault when it accidently shared information about Mr C’s move and death and has apologised for the distress this caused. The Council will re-train its staff to try and avoid future mistakes
10. I appreciate how distressing this must have been, and still is, for Ms B. The Council has explained the attorney was the person with the authority to make decisions on behalf of Mr C, including the sharing of information. It has explained its decision to uphold this after Mr C’s death. It is unlikely we would find fault in how the Council reached its decision, and we cannot tell it that it must share information with Ms B.
11. Ms B made a freedom of information request to the Council and is not happy with the way it responded. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights and would be better placed to consider this concern and what information Ms B is entitled to.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because we are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would add anything further or achieve a different outcome. The ICO is better placed to decide what information, if any, Ms B is entitled to see.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman