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. Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 008 699) Summary: Ms Y complained the Council failed to arrange the necessary support to help meet Mr Z's social care and housing needs. As a result, she says Mr Z's health and wellbeing rapidly deteriorated, and he was eventually detained in hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA). Essex County Council (22 014 275) Summary: The Council has acknowledged it was at fault in the way it failed to meet Mrs X's needs fully over a period of 5 years, relying on Mr X to provide support himself or pay for it privately. The Council has already offered reimbursement in a number of key areas and has now agreed to further recognise the considerable anxiety and frustration suffered by Mr X while he awaited a resolution. City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (22 014 520) Summary: Mrs Y complained about the way the Council handled her application for a disabled facilities grant. We have not found fault by the Council in the way it dealt with her application or responded to her complaint. Kent County Council (22 017 446) Summary: Mrs X complained the Council agreed to allow her late father Mr Y to leave residential care and return home despite him having dementia, fluctuating mental capacity and a high risk of falls and self-neglect. The Council was not at fault in the way it assessed Mr Y's capacity and allowed him to go home. It has already acknowledged poor communication and a delay in referring Mrs X for a carers assessment in its complaint response. It has already apologised for this which was appropriate. It has agreed to provide us with evidence it has carried out the actions it said it would take to prevent a recurrence of these faults in future. North Northamptonshire Council (22 013 309) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the actions of the Council during the process of detaining Mr X's son under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983. The complaint is mostly against an NHS organisation and so more suitable for a different Ombudsman to consider. Even if we were to investigate the Council's actions, we would be unlikely to find fault. London Borough of Islington (22 018 100) Summary: Mr D complained the Council delayed paying his mother in her role as a shared lives carer. We find the Council was at fault for its delay in paying Mr D's mother. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault. London Borough of Hackney (23 001 924) Summary: We have upheld this complaint about a blue badge reassessment because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X. Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (23 003 639) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs C's complaint about the Council's refusal to fund an annual holiday for her son, Mr B. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation. North Northamptonshire Council (23 003 708) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about failure to share a copy of an adult social care and support plan. This is because the Council has accepted fault and apologised for the impact of that fault. We are satisfied this is appropriate action in response. We could not add to the Council's investigation and are unlikely to achieve a different outcome. Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (22 009 159) Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to properly deal with Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) and Safe Warm and Dry Grant (SWD) applications and there was a delay in carrying out the works. We found there was fault in how the Council dealt with issues causing delay to the DFG works. There was also some delay in resolving Mr X's complaint which warranted a remedy. Staffordshire County Council (22 010 205) Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council has assessed the financial contribution he should make towards the cost of his care and support. Mr X says the Council failed to carry out a financial assessment over two years, properly record payments, and incorrectly assessed both his contribution and his outstanding debt. We have found the Council at fault for not considering whether Mr X's care and support plan, and allocated personal budget, were sufficient for his care needs. We have made recommendations to remedy the injustice this caused. We have not found the Council at fault for asking Mr X to provide relevant financial information, or for how it issued reminders about the debt. Lancashire County Council (22 011 703) Summary: Ms X complained about the Council's allocation of a male social worker to her case, his conduct and poor complaint handling. We have found fault only with the way it responded to her complaint. To remedy the distress caused to Ms X, the Council has agreed to apologise and take action to improve its complaint handling. The Council was not otherwise at fault. Durham County Council (22 017 918) Summary: The Council failed to provide Mr X with timely information about charges for adult services when his son moved from children's services to adult services. It failed to provide adequate information and support about disability related expenditure and failed to explain the process of adult social care. Nottinghamshire County Council (23 002 290) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about a previous care home not allowing her to wash her husband Mr X's clothes, and the loss of some of his clothes and a set of dentures. There is insufficient personal injustice to Mr or Mrs X from her not being able to do Mr X's washing to warrant an investigation. We could not add to the care home's investigation to find the lost items, investigation would not result in a different outcome, and the matter does not cause such significant injustice to her or Mr X to justify us investigating. Kcare Nursing Agency Limited (23 003 604) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care provider's response to Mr X's report of a safeguarding concerns. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and it is unlikely we could add anything to the investigation already carried out. City of Wolverhampton Council (23 004 567) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about staff behaviour at a care setting providing adult social care on behalf of the Council. This is because the police have already investigated the incident and they are best placed to investigate intimidation and assault. An Ombudsman investigation would not lead to a different outcome and cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants, as we cannot get involved in staffing matters. Leeds City Council (23 004 651) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about adaptations to her bathroom under the disabled facilities grant procedures. Although there was some fault, it has not caused enough injustice to start an investigation. London Borough of Lambeth (23 004 730) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about her late sister Ms Y's stay in a care home commissioned by the Council. We do not investigate where we cannot remedy the core injustice caused to someone who has died. There is insufficient other injustice stemming from Ms Y's provision to warrant us investigating. We cannot add to the investigation already done by the home, or reach a different outcome to that of the home and coroner. London Borough of Croydon (22 008 543) Summary: Ms A has complained on behalf of a supported accommodation placement that the Council and Integrated Care Board have not paid accommodation costs for a placement from March 2022. We found fault with the Council, the Trust and the Integrated Care Board the Council and Integrated Care Board have now agreed to pay the accommodation fees and apologise to Ms A. Harrogate Borough Council (22 014 589) Summary: We found fault in the way the Council handled the complainant's (Miss X) Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG). This fault caused Miss X injustice. The Council agreed to apologise, make payments for the delays in carrying out remedial works and distress and review its process of supervising the quality of works carried out by its contractors. Cumbria County Council (22 015 038) Summary: Miss X complained about how a Care Provider acting on behalf of the Council failed to meet her daughter's basic needs. We have found fault causing an injustice to Miss X and her daughter. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and monitor the service. Luton Borough Council (22 015 676) Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not dealt properly with his social care. The Council has fully upheld his complaint and confirmed there is a waiting list of other people awaiting support. The Council has said it will apologise, refund Mr B any excess payments and support him to employ another personal assistant. The Council has also agreed to pay Mr B £500 for the avoidable distress this caused him and provide a report to the Ombudsman. Sunderland City Council (22 016 100) Summary: Care provided to Mr X at a residential care home, on behalf of the Council, was below an acceptable standard. A safeguarding investigation completed by the Council into complaints raised about the care was insufficient. Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (21 006 547) Summary: Mr X complains about a Section 117 after care package provided by the Council. The Council is at fault as Mr X did not consistently receive his full package of care. There is also no evidence to show the Council sent the wellbeing and recovery plans to Mr X. These faults caused uncertainty to Mr X which the Council has agreed to remedy by apologising and making a payment of £300 to him. There is no evidence to show the Council coerced Mr X into accepting a care package or that it failed to consider a request to increase his care package and request for a personal budget. Staffordshire County Council (23 002 828) Summary: Mrs X complained about the late payment to her son, of overpaid contributions he made towards his care costs. We upheld the complaint, finding the Council delayed in refunding this money. This put Mrs X to unnecessary time, trouble and uncertainty. The Council has accepted these findings. At the end of this statement, we set out the action it has agreed to remedy that injustice. London Borough of Barnet (23 003 409) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of Mr X's mother's care placement. He says the Council failed to find a care home for his mother that was nearer to her family. This is because the Court of Protection is best placed to consider the matter and it is reasonable for Mr X to take this to court. London Borough of Brent (23 003 733) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's hospital discharge team. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a worthwhile outcome for Mrs X. Surrey County Council (23 004 108) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council unlawfully detained the complainant under the Mental Health Act. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault and further investigation would achieve nothing meaningful. 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