The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care in a residential care home. This is because it is unlikely we could add to investigations already undertaken by the coroner and the local authority safeguarding team.
The complaint
Ms B says the Care Provider gave poor care to her father, Mr C. Ms B says the record keeping and communication was poor, and the Care Provider has failed to respond to all the issues of complaint. Ms B says this has affected her mental health and she feels she let Mr C down. Ms B wants the Ombudsman to identify where things went wrong and identify what the Care Provider can do to put things right.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe: the action has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation, or it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr C lived at Brook Court care home, run by Care UK Community Partnerships Ltd (the Care Provider). Following Mr C’s death there have been investigations by the coroner’s office and the local authority safeguarding team. These investigations have found failures in care, a missed opportunity to seek medical attention, and failures in record keeping. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would add anything further. These bodies will already have explored actions the Care Provider can take or has taken to improve its service.
The Ombudsman can achieve no personal remedy for Mr C for the impact of the failings in his care because Mr C has since died. It is distressing for Ms B to know the Care Provider failed in some aspects of her father’s care, but that would not justify an Ombudsman investigation. The Care Provider has apologised to Ms B, and it is unlikely we would achieve anything further.
Ms B is unhappy with the way the Care Provider responded to her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of heath and social care in England. The CQC has fundamental standards below which care should never fall. The Care Provider’s actions may breach the fundamental standards.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add to previous independent investigations already undertaken, reach a different outcome, or achieve anything further.
Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman