The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a missing item from a residential care home. This is because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation which could not identify how and when the item went missing. It would be more suitable for the police or insurance company to consider the complaint about the missing item, as either theft or a claim to replace the lost item.
The complaint
Ms B says the care home where her sister, Ms C, lived, took Ms C’s mobile telephone from Ms C and has lost it. Ms B says the care home are lying and saying they never had it. When Ms B reported this to the Council, it took a long time to respond, and the Council did not contact witnesses. Ms B wants the Ombudsman to find out why people are lying.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms C lived at Ami Group care home (the Care Provider). The Council arranged her placement so remains responsible for meeting her care and support needs.
Ms B says when Ms C first moved to the care home she was confused and using her mobile telephone to call the police, so the Care Provider took the phone away. When Ms B asked for the telephone the Care Provider could not find it, and now denies ever having it. There are no records to support the Care Provider had the telephone.
The Council completed a safeguarding investigation about the missing telephone but could not decide what had happened to it. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation could add to that investigation or reach a different outcome.
If Ms B suspects the telephone was stolen, then that is a matter of theft and should be reported to the police. If Ms B suspects the Care Provider has lost or damaged the telephone, that would be a matter for relevant insurers to consider a claim for the item.
Ms B is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because we could not add to the Council’s investigation, and it is unlikely further investigation would lead to a different outcome. There are other agencies better placed to consider the complaint about the missing item, either the police or relevant insurance company.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman