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. Lincolnshire County Council (23 014 273) Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to safeguard her daughter Ms X or carry out a proper investigation of her circumstances, which has resulted in delayed distress for Ms X. The evidence shows that the Council acted properly in the light of Ms X's capacity to make her own decisions about her future accommodation. London Borough of Croydon (24 009 003) Summary: Mrs X complained, on behalf of her husband Mr X, about how the Council dealt with her request for help with Mr X's care home placement. There was fault in how the Council assessed Mr X's needs and how it planned his care and support. This led to significant avoidable distress to Mr X and Mrs X; and also affected Mr X's mental health. The Council agreed to apologise, issue an amended care and support plan for Mr X, and pay both Mr and Mrs X a financial remedy. It also agreed to review its practices and arrange training for its staff. Cannock Chase District Council (24 011 873) Summary: Miss X complained about access works and a wet room installed under a disabled facilities grant. We have ended our investigation as it is unlikely we would find fault with the works to the access and further investigation is unlikely to lead to a worthwhile outcome. Flooding has led to the replacement of the wet room by Miss X's insurers and any claim for damages is best resolved through the insurers or court. Leeds City Council (24 016 904) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about errors and delays in carrying out a financial assessment to decide how much his mother should pay towards her residential care. This is because the Council has agreed to take appropriate action to remedy the uncertainty and avoidable time and trouble caused. Lancashire County Council (24 017 500) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about the Council's handling of a Disabled Facilities Grant. We could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council. Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council (24 017 858) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's decision to refuse his application for a Disabled Facilities Grant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation. Essex County Council (24 018 994) Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the Council's decision to decline her blue badge application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, there is no significant injustice. Kent County Council (24 021 383) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Wokingham Borough Council (24 005 266) Summary: Mr X complained that the Council's commissioned care provider misled him about the fees for his mother's care. The Council's care provider has subsequently restored the original fee level. The Council has also agreed to offer Mr X a symbolic payment in recognition of the frustration he was caused, and the time and trouble caused by its actions. Cheshire East Council (24 010 821) Summary: Mr Y complained about the Council's delay in telling his late mother, Mrs Z, about her care charges and that it calculated her charges incorrectly. The Council was at fault for significant delay. There was no fault in the way it calculated the care charges. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr Y and make a payment to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty he was caused. It has also agreed to review the way its finance and social work teams communicate to prevent similar delays in future. London Borough of Hillingdon (24 012 809) Summary: Ms C complained about the Council's poor communication and delay to arrange support at a day centre for her daughter (Ms X) as set out in her care and support plan. The Council accepted it was at fault and apologised. We found the Council's apology was not enough to remedy the injustice this caused Ms C and Ms X. The Council will make symbolic payments to acknowledge the injustice it faults caused. London Borough of Sutton (24 013 353) Summary: We will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the Council imposing a limit on disability related expenses in her financial assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. London Borough of Wandsworth (24 014 941) Summary: Mr X complains about the way London Borough of Wandsworth and South West and St George's Mental Health NHS Trust detained him in hospital for mental health treatment. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint. We are unlikely to find fault in the way Mr X was assessed before being detained. There is another organisation who is more suitable to consider the rest of his complaint. Cheshire East Council (24 015 482) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for adult social care. There is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice to justify our involvement. It is also unlikely we would add to what the Council said or reach a different outcome. Norfolk County Council (24 018 992) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council consulted on changes to its charging policy for non-residential care. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement. Lincolnshire County Council (24 003 962) Summary: Ms X complained about the Council's Care Act assessment, the amount and inconsistency of care she received, and how it communicated with her and shared her information. We found fault and a service failure by the Council which meant Ms X did not receive all the care and support she was entitled to and experienced distress. The Council will apologise and make payment to acknowledge the injustice this caused her. Coventry City Council (24 006 911) Summary: Mr X complained about the care provided to his wife by a care provider arranged by the Council. Mr X also complained the Council did not appropriately consider his concerns. He says the Council's actions caused avoidable distress and worry and resulted in him having to complete his wife's care. We found no fault by the Council. London Borough of Croydon (24 009 654) Summary: Miss X complains the Council has failed to assess her needs as her son's carer properly, leaving her without support. The Council was at fault over the way it did her 2024 carer's assessment. It needs to apologise, make a symbolic payment to her, and reassess her needs as her son's carer. The Council also needs to take action to improve its working practices. Reading Borough Council (24 018 724) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the personal budget and funding of an adult social care home placement. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in these issues. There was some delay by the Council but that does not cause a significant enough injustice to justify an Ombudsman investigation when we would not consider the main issue of complaint. Warrington Council (24 019 566) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Stoke-on-Trent City Council (24 004 570) Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to undertake a proper financial assessment of her husband's assets and as a result of the ensuing distress she had to take long-term sick leave. The evidence available shows the Council considered the relevant information proportionately, although there was an initial fault in the safeguarding enquiry which was remedied by an apology. Essex County Council (24 014 613) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about her son's transport journey time being too long. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the fault has not caused any significant injustice. Derbyshire County Council (24 018 587) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about the Council's decision to stop her daughter's direct payments in October 2024 and about an outstanding debt the Council says needs to be paid back. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, an investigation would not lead to any further outcomes. Cheshire West & Chester Council (24 018 786) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about funding for an adult social care respite stay in a residential care home. The complaint is a late complaint as the complainant knew about the matters two years ago. There are no good reasons the complaint could not have been made to us sooner. Essex County Council (24 019 407) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the functionality of the Council's website for Blue Badge applications. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable. Lancashire County Council (24 014 787) Summary: Ms X complained that Lancashire County Council carried out a faulty continuing healthcare checklist for her father, Mr X, in 2023. We consider the Council acted with fault. It did not share the checklist with the local NHS Integrated Care Board, which denied Ms X an opportunity to appeal the outcome. The Council also did not communicate clearly with Ms X when she requested another checklist in 2024. Ms X suffered confusion, frustration, uncertainty and time and trouble. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment to recognise her injustice. Nottinghamshire County Council (24 015 415) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about Ms Y's care provision and direct payment. This is because the Council is already taking suitable action to remedy the matters raised prior to our involvement. Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 016 723) Summary: We will not investigate Ms X's complaint about the Council's handling of her late mother's care home fees because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement. Devon County Council (24 017 903) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about funding residential care. The complaint starts from events in 2014, before the current law came into effect. Relevant people central to the complaint have died. It will now be difficult to prove the material facts about these historical allegations with reasonable confidence. The Information Commissioner's Office is better placed to consider concerns about the release of personal information. Surrey County Council (24 018 105) Summary: We will not investigate Mr X's complaint that the actions of a Council-commissioned care provider led to his wife's death. An investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome or achieve anything more. If Mr X considers the Council liable for her death, he can take the matter to court. Staffordshire County Council (24 018 336) Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charging for adult residential care. The Council delayed confirming the care charges and offered a repayment plan for the debt. The complainant accepted the care knowing they might have to pay for it, and the charges are rightly due. The offer of a repayment plan acknowledges the impact of the delay. There is no significant injustice to justify an investigation. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would add to the Council's investigation or reach a different outcome. Bupa Care Homes (ANS) Limited (24 019 207) Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X's complaint about a respite stay for her husband Mr X at a care home run by the Care Provider, and how it responded to her complaint. It is unlikely an investigation would add to the Care Provider's investigation or achieve a different outcome. There is insufficient significant personal injustice to Mr X or Mrs X to warrant an investigation. We do not investigate Care Providers' complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint. 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 ·5 Quinton Road, Coventry, CV1 2WT