Shropshire Council (25 002 900)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 02-Sep-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken in response to the complaint, including apologising to the complainant for distress caused by failing to accept her power of attorney. An Ombudsman investigation is unlikely to add anything further. There are other bodies better placed to consider the concerns about the actions of attorneys and what care is in a persons best interests.

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (25 003 342)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 02-Sep-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. The Council has completed a thorough investigation, accepted fault, apologised and will train staff in relevant areas. It is unlikely we would add to this or achieve anything further. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken.

London Borough of Brent (24 017 300)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 01-Sep-2025

Summary: Ms Y says the Council failed to act to safeguard Ms X and failed to carry out a needs assessment or provide Ms X with support. The Council accepts it failed to follow the right process when dealing with the safeguarding concerns raised and the request for a care assessment. That meant Ms X missed out on care support and a move to a safer property for more than two years and Ms Y experienced significant distress. An apology, payment to Ms Y and procedural changes are satisfactory remedy.

London Borough of Newham (24 008 894)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 01-Sep-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about how the Council handled adult safeguarding concerns. There is not a good reason for the delay in Miss X complaining to us.

Sheffield City Council (25 005 560)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 27-Aug-2025

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s action in connection with legal proceedings in the Court of Protection. This is because we have no remit to investigate.

Leicester City Council (25 001 533)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 25-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the outcome of safeguarding enquiries. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (25 002 639)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 25-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s responses to Mrs X’s complaints about care failings at her former place of work. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve anything worthwhile and there are more suitable agencies better addressed to deal with her complaints.

London Borough of Lambeth (24 022 555)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 19-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainant’s safeguarding referral. Part of the complaint is late and there is no good reason the complainant could not have come to us sooner. It is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the Council for more recent events.

London Borough of Brent (25 006 162)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 19-Aug-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s contact with the Council. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

London Borough of Haringey (24 014 203)

Report Upheld Safeguarding 19-Aug-2025

Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not act when she raised concerns about Mr Y’s welfare. She also complained about the Council’s handling of her complaint. Ms X said the Council’s actions caused distress to Mr Y, his family and Ms X. The Council was at fault. It has not evidenced it considered if it needed to act to safeguard Mr Y. This left Mr Y at risk of harm and caused Ms X, Mr Y and his family uncertainty. The Council’s complaint handling was poor and this caused frustration to Ms X.