Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a previous care home not allowing her to wash her husband Mr X’s clothes, and the loss of some of his clothes and a set of dentures. There is insufficient personal injustice to Mr or Mrs X from her not being able to do Mr X’s washing to warrant an investigation. We could not add to the care home’s investigation to find the lost items, investigation would not result in a different outcome, and the matter does not cause such significant injustice to her or Mr X to justify us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X is Mrs X’s husband. He was in care home A until recently moving to care home B, both placements commissioned by the Council. Mrs X complains on Mr X’s behalf that care home A:
1. would not allow her to do Mr X’s washing;
2. lost some of his clothing;
3. lost a tooth from one of his dentures.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information from Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Care home A explained to Mrs X there would be times when Mr X would need an item of clothing and would have to wait for it to be cleaned and returned to the home, rather than washed in their laundry. Staff explained why it would not always be practical for her to do Mr X’s washing. Even if there has been fault here, that Mrs X was not able to do all of Mr X’s washing while he was at care home A caused insufficient injustice to either of them to warrant an investigation. Given Mrs X has advised Mr X has moved to care home B, any injustice from this matter is also no longer ongoing.
5. Mrs X says some of Mr X’s clothing was lost by care home A, as well as a tooth from one of his dentures. The home says staff advised Mrs X to label Mr X’s clothes with his name or room number but this was not done. The home has been looking for the clothing and dentures reported as missing but has not found them. We could not add to the investigation already done by care home A to try to find Mr X’s clothes and dentures. Further investigation by us of these lost items would not result in a different outcome. While their loss will have caused some annoyance and inconvenience to Mr and Mrs X, the matter also does not cause such a significant injustice to them to justify us investigating.
6. If Mrs X considers care home A is responsible for the loss of Mr X’s property, she can pursue this with their insurers. She may decide to make a claim against her own insurance, or the home’s insurers if she believes her policy does not cover the items involved.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• her not being able to do all of Mr X’s washing at the home caused insufficient personal injustice to her or Mr X to warrant investigation; and
• we could not add to the care home’s investigation to look for the lost items; and
• investigation of the lost property issue would not result in a different outcome; and
• the lost property matter does not cause such a significant injustice to her or Mr X to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman