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. Cambridgeshire County Council (20 007 138) Summary: Ms X complained the Council incorrectly assessed her mother, Mrs Y's finances in 2017 and as a result required her to make contributions towards the cost of her care, which she could not afford. The Council's errors and delays in the assessment of Mrs Y's finances amount to fault. This fault has caused Ms X an injustice. Sheffield City Council (20 013 970) Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's decision not to renew her Disabled Person's Blue Badge and its decision not to issue her a concessionary travel pass. There is no evidence of fault by the Council. Liverpool City Council (21 002 636) Summary: We will not investigate Mr B's complaint about overpaid care charges following the death of his mother. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council has dealt with Mr B's refund request and we do not have powers to overrule a council's financial controls and auditing procedures. London Borough of Southwark (19 016 582) Summary: Ms Y complained about delays in her father's discharge from hospital, poor personal care, and said he was wrongly placed in isolation. We found delays by the Trust and Council in arranging Mr Z's discharge from hospital, leading to Mr Z remaining in hospital unnecessarily and causing distress to Ms Y. We have recommended the Trust and Council apologise to Ms Y, provide a financial remedy, and take steps to improve services. Warwickshire County Council (20 004 212) Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not adequately assess her care needs and failed to provide appropriate care and support between August 2018 and September 2020. The Council was not at fault. Gloucestershire County Council (20 005 410) Summary: The Council is at fault for delaying considering a complaint at stage two of the children's statutory complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to complete its stage two investigation without further delay and will offer to make a payment to the complainant to remedy the time and trouble its delay has caused her. Hampshire County Council (20 010 226) Summary: Ms B complained about the way the Council dealt with her request for contact with her brother, who was placed in foster care as a baby. We found fault by the Council in this matter, causing injustice to Ms B for which a remedy is recommended. Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (20 013 011) Summary: Mr B complained the Council wrongly refused his application for a Blue Badge. We find fault with the way the Council considered Mr B's application and the decision letters it issued. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused. Cherry Tree Lodge Limited (21 002 404) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about a care home's actions. The injustice experienced by Mrs X is not significant enough to justify an investigation. London Borough of Hillingdon (20 001 443) Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y, that the Council stopped Mrs Y's direct payments too early. That resulted in Mrs Y receiving invoices from HMRC and PayPacket, the third-party company who processed the payments to her carer. The Ombudsman found fault causing injustice when the Council failed to maintain proper oversight of Mrs Y's direct payment. Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council (20 003 099) Summary: The Council has failed in the service provided to Mr & Mrs C when carrying out its adult social care duties to their daughter, Miss D and to them as carers. The Council has taken no action to improve its relationship with Mr & Mrs C, despite a court order directing this. The Council has made changes to Miss D's care and support documents without a review and cannot explain the reasons for such changes. The Council's communication has been poor, including repeatedly sending correspondence in a format Mrs C told it she could not use. The Council has delayed completing a review of Miss D's care and support needs and did not deal with Mr & Mrs C's many complaints. The Council's actions have compounded Mr & Mrs C's distrust and only proved to worsen rather than better the relationship. Mr & Mrs C are upset, frustrated, and spend what should be much needed respite time from their caring role challenging the Council and dealing with complaints. The Council should take steps to improve its relationship, apologise and make a payment to acknowledge the impact of its errors, and clarify some outstanding issues. London Borough of Hillingdon (20 009 772) Summary: Mr X complained about errors in the way the Council calculated his contribution to his residential care costs. The Council was not at fault. P F Moss (21 002 041) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about how the care provider disposed of her Aunt's possessions. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the care provider. Manchester City Council (20 003 956) Summary: Mr B complained the Council failed to respond properly to his concerns about a carer and he felt intimidated. We found the Council was at fault. However, Mr B has received an apology and the Council has agreed to provide guidance to the Care Provider when completing investigations. This in an appropriate resolution to the complaint. Manchester City Council (20 006 314) Summary: There was fault in the Council's letters about charging, there was poor communication with Miss B and its charging policy was unclear and out of date. The Council also failed to provide certain documents and information to Miss B or provided the documents late. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss B and carry out service improvements. London Borough of Croydon (20 008 908) Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not protect his late grandmother from financial abuse and did not involve him in her care and financial decisions as had been agreed. He said that as a result a relative financially abused her and home care fees were not paid. There was some fault by the Council but it did not cause significant injustice to Mr X. Kent County Council (21 000 951) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about a bill for outstanding charges for her mother's care which she received in late 2018. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and I see no good grounds to consider this very late complaint now. West Sussex County Council (19 020 247) Summary: The Council was at fault for the way it considered Mr X's care costs. As a result, Mr X cannot be sure he is being charged the correct amount. The Council has agreed to re-make its decision to remedy the injustice caused to Mr X. London Borough of Hillingdon (20 002 972) Summary: the complainant Dr X complained the Council failed to properly review his brother's social care placement and give proper notice and information when calling a best interest meeting. Dr X said the Council also failed to correct errors in his brother's assessment when drawn to its attention. The Council says it needs to ensure the placement continues to meet all assessed needs and offers the least restrictive option. We found the Council acted with fault and recommended a remedy. Independent People Homecare Services (20 010 369) Summary: Mrs X complains the care provider failed to provide a suitable carer for her care needs. As a result, she had no choice but to commission an alternative care provider. We find fault with the care provider and have made recommendations. Care UK Community Partnerships Limited (21 000 383) Summary: Mr A has complained about the actions of the Home and a Trust regarding the loss of his mother's engagement ring. We will not investigate due to there being no likelihood of achieving the outcome Mr A wants. Hartlepool Borough Council (21 002 354) Summary: We will not investigate Ms B's complaint about care provided to her late father, Mr C. This is because we could not provide a remedy for any injustice caused to Mr C from any fault an investigation might uncover as he is now deceased. Ms B has not been caused a significant enough injustice from the actions of Mr C's care provider to warrant an Ombudsman investigation. Luton Borough Council (20 007 338) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the standard of care Mrs Y's late husband received. This is because it is there is an ongoing Safeguarding Adults Review. Once this has concluded it would be reasonable for Mrs Y to ask the Council to review her complaint. Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (20 000 917) Summary: there is no fault by Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council in its handling of care home availability and a third party top-up for placements in a care home for the complainant's parents St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (19 017 594) Summary: Mr B complained about the care given to his late mother (Mrs C) in two care homes. He said she and the family were caused distress and uncertainty. We found fault in the way the Council communicated to Mr B regarding CCTV footage of his mother and the Council agreed it failed to carry out a monitoring visit of one of the homes or inform the family of the outcome of the safeguarding investigation. The Council has already apologised and offered to pay £300. It has also agreed to pay a further £200 (the total of £500 to be offset against the outstanding bill). 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