Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult safeguarding. The person using the service has died so has no injustice for us to now consider and remedy. The person making the complaint does not have a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council failed to safeguard her relative, Mr C, in his lifetime. This left Ms B feeling distressed, frustrated and helpless. Ms B wants to see the Council’s records and understand its decision making. Ms B wants service improvements to prevent future errors.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2) and 34C(2), as amended)

3. We have accepted Ms B as a suitable representative.
4. 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
8. Mr C has died so we can provide him with no remedy for the impact of any fault, so we cannot consider his injustice. Mr C also no longer needs safeguarding. It appears the way Mr C lived was a result of his capacitated decisions to refuse support the Council offered to declutter and clean his home. Under the Mental Capacity Act people can make decisions others think are unwise. Although Ms B feels worried and frustrated, and felt helpless to support Mr C in his lifetime, this is not a significant enough injustice to justify an Ombudsman investigation.
9. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights. If Ms B believes the Council is not giving her information she should have, she can contact the ICO about that.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough injustice to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman