Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a safeguarding investigation. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council’s social services harassed her, swore at her, and vandalised her home while investigating safeguarding concerns.

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. (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. The Council received safeguarding referrals from professional agencies raising concerns about Mrs X’s safety.
6. The Council has a duty to protect vulnerable adults. This is safeguarding. When the Council receives a concern about a vulnerable adult it must make necessary enquiries about the concern and act to keep the adult safe.
7. The Council followed its safeguarding process and investigated the concerns it received. While I recognise Mrs X did not want the concerns to be investigated, after reviewing the referrals, I am satisfied the Council had a duty to investigate. I have also seen no evidence Council employees harassed and swore at Mrs X or vandalised her home during their investigations. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman