Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the domiciliary care provided to her late father Mr Y by the care firm commissioned by the Council. There is insufficient significant injustice to Mrs X to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The late Mr Y was Mrs X’s father. He had advanced dementia. Mrs X was Mr Y’s carer for him and his wife Mrs Y from 2022. Mr Y had a care package for some personal care and help with lunches for about 5 weeks in 2024, commissioned from the Council from a care provider. Mrs Y could no longer help as she had cancer then died in spring 2024. Mrs X complains:
1. many different carers attended over the weeks;
2. the carers failed to provide the personal care Mr Y required;
3. carers could not prepare Mr Y’s food without her supervision.
2. Mrs X says poor and inconsistent carers added to the pressure on her when it should have reduced it, because she could not step away from providing care. She says this added to her mental and physical exhaustion at a distressing time. Mrs X says dealing with the complaint took time away she should have spent grieving her mother. She says the Council charging for the care adds insult to injury.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mrs X and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The core complaint issue is about the standard of domiciliary care Mr Y received. Mrs X considers that care provision was inadequate. The Council’s response to the complaint shows Mr Y’s care involved about 10 different carers, that on some occasions he did not receive all the personal care required, and that some carers needed guidance or assurance when preparing lunches. The primary impact of these issues was on Mr Y. We focus our investigations on matters where there has been significant personal injustice, but also where we can then provide outcomes for the recipient of the service. We cannot provide such outcomes where the service user has died. We are unable to provide a remedy for the late Mr Y so will not investigate.
6. We recognise the care to Mr Y also affected Mrs X at a stressful and pressured time because of her mother Mrs Y’s health and death. That the carers did not meet the standard of care and knowledge of how to provide it which she had would have caused her understandable additional frustration and annoyance at an already difficult and distressing time. That Mrs X was compelled to complain soon after Mrs Y’s death would have taken some time and focus from her grieving. But the amount of additional injustice to Mrs X stemming directly from the care matters complained of, and of the complaint she made to the Council, is not sufficient to warrant an investigation by us.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient significant personal injustice to her to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman