Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Portsmouth City Council’s safeguarding enquiries. Mrs X should have complained sooner to us, and if we did investigate, we would most likely not be able to achieve a meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that Portsmouth City Council (the Council) did not investigate all her concerns about her husband’s (Mr X) care and support at a Nursing Home under its safeguarding procedures. It then did not share the outcome of its safeguarding enquiries with her. Mrs X said that caused her stress and would like the Council to recognise its failings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsmen cannot investigate late complaints unless they decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to the Ombudsmen about something an organisation has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. The Ombudsmen provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. They may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if they believe it is unlikely they would find fault or it is unlikely they could add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered information Mrs X has provided in writing and spoke to her on the telephone. Mrs X had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered her comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

5. Section 42 of the Care Act 2014 says that a council must make necessary enquiries if it has reason to think a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has needs for care and support which mean he or she cannot protect himself or herself. It must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse or risk.
6. In May 2021, following safeguarding concerns about Mr X, the Council agreed to carry out a Section 42 enquiry. It completed its Section 42 report in June 2021 but did not share that with Mrs X until after she complained in February 2022. It apologised for not sharing it sooner and agreed to review that process to ensure that does not happen again to others.
7. In April 2022, Mrs X told the Council she was unhappy the Section 42 enquiry did not include her concerns about the lack of communication from the Nursing Home in 2021. Two months later, the Council said other organisations (the Nursing Home and Integrated Care Board [who funded the placement]) were better placed to consider that under their complaints process, rather than as a safeguarding concern.
8. Mrs X complained to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman in July 2022.

Analysis

9. Firstly, I consider this complaint is late. Mrs X should have complained to us about the Section 42 enquiry sooner than she did. She did not complain until February 2022, and approached the Ombudsman 12 months after being aware there was a problem. I am not persuaded Mrs X has provided good reasons why she took so long to complain about the Council’s Section 42 enquiry.
10. In any event, I do not consider an Ombudsman investigation would achieve a meaningful outcome for Mrs X. The Council accepted it should have communicated the outcome of the Section 42 enquiry in June 2021. It apologised and agreed to review the process to ensure that mistake did not happen again. If we investigated Mrs X’s complaint, we would most likely make the same recommendations.
11. Mrs X also told us the Section 42 enquiry did not include her concern about the lack of communication from the Nursing Home. I consider the Council appropriately referred Mrs X to the Nursing Home and Integrated Care Board to consider that as a complaint (which she did). I agree that route was more appropriate to resolve her concern. So, I am unlikely to find fault with the Council’s acted with fault.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not investigate this complaint. Mrs X should have complained about the Council sooner than she did. In any event, we could not achieve a meaningful outcome for Mrs X. Also, I am unlikely to find fault with the Council’s decision not to consider all her concerns during its Section 42 enquiry.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman