Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the quality of care her mother, Mrs Y, received. The Council has already completed safeguarding and complaint investigations and not found evidence of neglect or risk of harm by the Care Provider’s staff. Further investigation by us is unlikely to achieve anything more.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y. Miss X complains carers working for Company B have handled her roughly and do not speak English well enough to communicate clearly. Miss X says Mrs Y has suffered a head injury while Company B’s carers have delivered care and ended up bedbound because of a lack of movement out of bed. Miss X believes Company B should not be allowed to continue operating and the staff involved should be dismissed.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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 has completed complaint and safeguarding investigations in relation to Miss X’s complaints about the care Company B has provided to Mrs Y. Miss X and Mrs Y’s other relative were able to attend an online safeguarding meeting the Council held in November 2025. The Council concluded it was not possible to say Mrs Y was put at risk of abuse or neglect by the care Company B delivered. The Council noted that Company B would no longer be providing care for Mrs Y when she was discharged from hospital.
6. The Council’s complaint response to Miss X explained that a Manager from Company B has made a visit to Mrs Y while she received care to observe the quality of work staff completed. They found no evidence of poor care or English language skills to corroborate Miss X’s concerns. The Council confirmed Company B would refresh staff training for a specific care task as Mrs Y had expressed experiencing discomfort. The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaints and noted that Company B would no longer be working with Mrs Y.
7. Further investigation by us is unlikely to identify new or different evidence to that which the Council has already considered. Also, we do not have the jurisdiction to achieve the outcomes Miss X wants. We have no powers to stop Company B from operating, nor can we compel it to dismiss the staff involved.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because further investigation is unlikely to uncover anything new and we cannot achieve the outcomes the complainant wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman