The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Care Home was failing to safeguard her mother. The Office of Public Guardian is best placed to consider her concerns, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
Mrs X complained the Care Home where her mother Mrs Y lived, had failed to safeguard her. Mrs X said Mrs Y was being financially abused by her Lasting Power of Attorney (LPOA). She said Mrs Y was also going without toiletries, being forced to wear old clothes and that personal items had gone missing. She said the Care Home was failing to support her to take Mrs Y on outings. She said Mrs Y’s personal items had gone missing and that the Care Home was blocking Mrs Y seeing family members. Mrs X wants the Care Home to recognise it has done the wrong thing by failing to act.
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: further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Care Home failing to safeguard Mrs Y for the following reasons. Firstly, Mrs X’s complaint is fundamentally about Mrs Y’s LPOA. She is alleging that they are misusing Mrs Y’s money, restricting her contact with wider family members and failing to act in Mrs Y’s best interests. This is a disagreement that has been ongoing for several years.
If Mrs X has concerns about the LPOA, she would need to report these to the Office of Public Guardian (OPG). The OPG is responsible for investigating concerns about the misuse of an LPOA.
Secondly, the Care Home has reported it has no safeguarding concerns about Mrs Y. It said Mrs Y has the necessary toiletries, clothing and equipment to support her care. The Care Home said Mrs X could take Mrs Y on outings, however, this was down to staff availability. I am satisfied the Care Home has properly considered Mrs X’s concerns. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.
Finally, Mrs X states that Mrs Y does not have capacity. Where a person cannot authorise someone to act on their behalf, we must consider whether that representative is suitable. Mrs X is not Mrs Y’s LPOA, therefore, we do not consider her a suitable representative to act on Mrs Y’s behalf. Therefore, we will not investigate her complaints that Mrs Y’s belongings have gone missing. It is for the LPOA to raise with the Care Home if they have concerns about this.,
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the Office of Public Guardian is best placed to consider her concerns, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman