Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a safeguarding investigation. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X said that the Council did not address concerns about Mrs Y’s welfare.
2. Mr X said Mrs Y has been left vulnerable for over 20 years and it had caused distress to Mr X.
3. Mr X asked for an independent investigation and the matter to be referred to the appropriate legal authority.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 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

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. Mr X’s mother, Mrs Y, lives with her daughter Ms Z and has additional support from a care provider. Prior to living with Ms Z, Mrs Y lived independently. A safeguarding concern related to alleged financial abuse by Mr X was raised by Mrs Y’s care provider and it asked the Council to investigate. Mr X raised a safeguarding concern alleging Ms Z was financially abusing Mrs Y.
8. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect.
9. The Council commenced a safeguarding investigation. It held a meeting to establish the views of Mr X and Ms Z. The Council spoke with Mrs Y separately. It gave Mr X and Ms Z the opportunity for comment on the minutes of the meeting.
10. The Council concluded the allegations of financial abuse and financial mismanagement were not substantiated. The Council closed its investigation and advised any evidence of alleged financial abuse should be directed to the police.
11. Mr X brought a complaint to the Council about the handling of the safeguarding process. The Council considered his concerns in line with its complaint handling policy
12. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong. We will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council carried out its safeguarding investigation to justify investigating. The Council carried out a safeguarding investigation, considered and included feedback from Mr X. The Council concluded allegations of financial abuse and financial mismanagement were not substantiated.
14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how it handled a safeguarding investigation, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement, and we could not achieve the outcome he seeks.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman