Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council followed its safeguarding procedures. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate now.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about the way the Council followed its safeguarding procedures after it received safeguarding concerns about his late father-in-law’s, Mr C, respite stay in a residential care home. Mr B says the Council completed safeguarding investigations relating to Mr C’s respite stay but they were below expected standards. Mr B says this caused distress to him and his wife who is Mr C’s daughter. As an outcome he wants the Council to confirm which specific records the care provider falsified and to confirm why five of the care provider’s staff breached the terms of the Care Act 2014.

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 cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr C went into a privately arranged respite placement in September 2022. He stayed for 17 days, and Mr B said he was admitted into hospital following the respite the stay.
7. The Council received a safeguarding concern in October 2022 and then followed its safeguarding procedures by starting a section 42 enquiry. A section 42 enquiry under the Care Act 2014 relates to the duty of the Council to make enquiries, or have others do so, if an adult may be at risk of abuse or neglect. This happens whether the Council is providing any care and support services to that adult.
8. Mr B said he received the outcome of the safeguarding enquiry in January 2023 and by this date he had received some of Mr C’s care records. Mr B said he met with Council officers following the outcome of the first safeguarding enquiry which had identified areas of learning for the care provider. Mr B provided the Council with information which showed the care provider had falsified records in his view. The Council reopened the safeguarding enquiry and sent a copy of the safeguarding report to Mr B once it had reached an outcome.
9. Following further concerns from Mr B the Council agreed to revisit its second s42 enquiry as well as deal with a complaint. The Council responded to the complaint in August 2023 with a first response. It provided a second stage response in November 2023 as Mr B was dissatisfied with its first response. The Council said the first response did not sufficiently address the key issues Mr B had raised.
10. The Council said it had met with the care provider’s representative who confirmed the care provider had identified its care workers had falsified some of Mr C’s care records. It confirmed the care provider had followed its disciplinary procedures and dismissed employees.
11. The Council’s stage two complaint response confirmed it would address learning for its safeguarding team and the officer involved. It apologised for the distress caused to Mr B and his wife and offered a payment of £500 in recognition of the time and trouble taken to complain. Mr B said he rejected this payment as he was waiting for the Council to complete the third safeguarding enquiry and he was determined to establish the truth. The Council directed Mr B to complain to the Ombudsman as it had exhausted its complaint procedures.
12. The Council issued the third safeguarding enquiry report which identified poor record keeping by the Care Provider as an issue. The report noted the Care Provider had acknowledged it had completed several records after Mr C’s stay. In response to this the Council said the Care Provider had shared information with the regulator and the Disclosure and Barring Service. The Council said it met with Mr B in January 2024 to discuss the outcome of its third safeguarding enquiry report.
13. Mr B did not complain to us when directed to do so by the Council. He said he continued to correspond with the Council after its final complaint response as he was giving it an opportunity to resolve his concerns.
14. Mr B complained to us in July 2025. Mr B’s complaint to us is late as he was aware of the issues of concern from 2023 once the Council had completed its complaint procedures and safeguarding procedures. There are no good reasons to investigate now.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is late and there are no good reasons to investigate now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman