New adult social care complaint decisions

View online A weekly update on adult social care complaint decisions Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case. London Borough of Merton (20 004 448) Summary: Ms X complains the Council failed to assess her father's (Mr Y's) needs properly, failed to identify an indicative personal budget or agree a final budget. The Council failed to meet Mr Y's needs after his capital fell below £23,250 and failed to assess the risk to him from moving to another care home. This left him paying for his own care when the Council should have been helping to fund it. It should refund Mr Y, apologise to his daughter and pay her financial recompense. West Sussex County Council (20 009 101) Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to deal properly with the charges for his father's (Mr Y's) residential care, and now expects the family to sell the property his parents transferred to a Trust in 2012. The Council failed to deal with the matter properly by making assumptions rather than exploring all the circumstances around the setting up of the Trust. However, the Council has corrected its fault by reconsidering its decision that Mr Y deliberately deprived himself of capital to avoid care charges in 2012. Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 009 633) Summary: Mr X complains about overcharging his late father-in-law, Mr Y, by the Council's care provider Comfort Call Tameside. The Council accepts Mr Y was overcharged. It has remedied the injustice by repaying money to his estate and paying financial redress to Mr X for the distress caused and the time and trouble it has put him to. It needs to identify anyone else who has been affected and repay any overpayments. Staffordshire County Council (20 011 637) Summary: Mr A complains about the actions carried out by the Trust on behalf of the Council in relation to his mother being moved from his home to his sister's residence. We will not investigate this complaint as there is no likelihood of us finding fault with the Council's actions in relation to assessment and safeguarding. Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (20 011 637a) Summary: Mr A complains about the actions carried out by the Trust on behalf of the Council in relation to his mother being moved from his home to his sister's residence. We will not investigate this complaint as there is no likelihood of us finding fault with the Council's actions in relation to assessment and safeguarding. Essex County Council (21 001 106) Summary: We will not investigate Ms B's complaint about the actions of her sister's Ms C's social worker. This is because the Council has acknowledged its failings, apologised and offered to reassess Ms C care needs. We are satisfied the injustice caused to Ms C by the actions of the Council has been remedied. Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council (20 007 901) Summary: Mrs X complained about the level of care provided to her father, Mr Y, in the last two weeks of his life during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Care Provider failed to keep a proper record in the last hours of Mr Y's life, causing uncertainty for Mrs X about what happened around the time of his death. The care was provided on behalf of the Council and therefore the Council will apologise for this fault. Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 011 330) Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council assessed Mr X's care and support needs in December 2020. Therefore, the Ombudsman cannot question the outcome of the assessments or the subsequent decisions the Council made. Birmingham City Council (20 005 788) Summary: There is no fault in the way the Council dealt with safeguarding concerns raised about Mr Y, his discharge from hospital, and his transfer to a care home. There is no evidence to support Ms X's claim a social worker discriminated against because of her mental health, harassed her or blocked her application to obtain power of attorney for Mr Y. Wakefield City Council (20 007 654) Summary: Mrs X complains the Council hasn't dealt properly with a financial assessment for Mrs Y. The Council is not at fault. London Borough of Lewisham (20 011 358) Summary: There was no fault by the Council in refusing to place Mr Y in a care home because the Council's assessment of his social care needs concluded he could receive home care safely and he did not require residential care. Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 013 003) Summary: We will not investigate a complaint about how a personal budget application was carried out by the Council. This is because the Council has already investigated the matter and taken action to improve its services so an investigation by us would be unlikely to achieve more for the complainant. London Borough of Lambeth (21 001 659) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an application for a Blue Badge because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Nottinghamshire County Council (19 019 681) Summary: Mr C complained about the standard of care provided to his late mother at a Council commissioned care home, the visiting restrictions imposed on him by the care home, and the Council's safeguarding process which failed to uphold his complaints. Mr C says the Council's failures have caused him personal distress and anxiety and his mother's health deteriorated because of the inadequate care she received. County Care Berkshire Ltd (18 008 976) Summary: Ms X suffered injustice due to fault in the way County Care Berkshire Limited provided a home care service to her late mother, Mrs A. We have made recommendations for a remedy. Sadly Mrs A passed away after Ms X made the complaint so it is too late to provide a remedy for her. Autism West Midlands (20 001 179) Summary: We have not found fault with the care plan the Agency provided, the support provided or the Agency's attempts to obtain an advocate for Mr C. However, there has been fault, during certain times, related to timekeeping, staff availability and communication. Also, the Agency's record keeping relating to a safeguarding incident was not in line with its policy. The Agency has agreed to apologise to Mr B and Mr C and pay Mr C £150. Herefordshire Council (20 005 830) Summary: Mr D complains the Council failed to advise him in 2015 and 2018 that he could apply for discretionary funding to adapt his home for his disabled wife. We have found no fault by the Council. Health Care Management Trust (20 006 336) Summary: Ms D complains Healthcare Management Trust was negligent when caring for her late father at Coloma Court Care Home. We have found fault causing injustice. The Care Provider should apologise to Ms D. Manchester City Council (20 008 004) Summary: Mrs X complains for her mother Mrs Z the Council failed to provide care, advice and support to the family when Mrs Z needed residential care so they have been charged care home fees. We found fault because the Council did not send written information to Mrs Z's family about care home placements and costs. But this fault did not cause Mrs X or Mrs Z an injustice and so we have completed our investigation. Kent County Council (20 008 202) Summary: The Council made all attempts to assist Mr X with the provision of care. There is no fault by the Council. Herefordshire Council (21 001 286) Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about funding for her mother's residential care. This is because funding has now been secured and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more. If circumstances change, Mrs X can bring a fresh complaint to the Ombudsman. London Borough of Islington (21 001 450) Summary: We will not investigate Mr B's complaint about the way the Council considered his complaint about the way he has been treated by the Council when he complained about his Freedom Pass. This is because the issues with the pass have been resolved and where we are not investigating the substantive matters we will not normally consider the way a council deals with a complaint. That is the case here. We look at individual complaints about local public services and all registerable social care providers in England. We remedy injustice and share learning from investigations to improve services. When we find a council or care provider has done something wrong, we recommend how it should put it right. We are free to use and make our decisions independently. Find out more about us at www.lgo.org.uk Manage preferences or unsubscribe Contact us

This email was sent to ooseims.archieves@blogger.com using GovDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman · 53-55 Butts Road · Coventry · CV1 3BH