Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Care Provider not meeting his wife Mrs X’s care needs during her planned two-week respite stay, a staff member making comments to her which upset her, and how it dealt with his complaint. Investigation by us is unlikely to add to the Care Provider’s investigation nor achieve a different outcome. There is not enough evidence of actions by the Care Provider amounting to fault to warrant us investigating. We do not investigate providers’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X has physical and mental health conditions including cerebral palsy, Parkinson’s disease and bipolar disorder. Mr X is her husband and carer. He booked Mrs X into respite care for two weeks at Leonard Lodge, run by the Care Provider. Mrs X left the home after six days. Mr X complains:
1. the Care Provider failed to provide Mrs X with sufficient personal and hygiene care, or sufficient sleep;
2. a staff member made comments to Mrs X which affected her mental health and required her to leave the home;
3. the Care Provider failed to reply promptly to his contacts during the complaint.
2. Mr X says the matters complained of and the complaint process have caused him stress and taken up his time. Mr X wants Mrs X to be fully refunded for the unused part of her booking, about £2,200.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers and decide whether their actions have caused an injustice, or could have caused injustice, to the person making the complaint. I have used the term fault to describe such actions. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B and 34C)
4. 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:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider; or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome; or
• the action has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In response to Mr X’s complaint, the Care Provider reviewed Mrs X’s records relating to her stay at the home and spoke to relevant staff. The information gathered did not indicate the respite placement was not meeting Mrs X’s care needs during her stay. That Mrs X found sleep difficult for the time she was in the care home setting was not due to action amounting to fault by the Care provider. The Care Provider considered the available information relating to Mrs X’s care provision. There would be no further evidence available to an Ombudsman investigation. An investigation by us would not add to the one already conducted by the Care Provider, nor result in a different outcome, so we will not investigate.
7. We have no reason to doubt Mrs X was upset by the conversation she reports with a staff member. But equally we have no grounds to doubt the Care Provider’s position that the staff member’s comments were well-intentioned. If we did investigate, we could not make a finding that the contents of the conversation amounted to actions intended to cause Mrs X to leave the home. We recognise Mrs X felt she had to leave after the conversation, and she was entitled to make that decision. But neither the staff member nor the Care Provider could have known that leaving would be the only response Mrs X considered was available to her. Leaving was her response to a conversation, not to a failure by the Provider to comply with the respite contract. There is not enough evidence of actions amounting to fault by the Care Provider here to justify us investigating.
8. Mr X complains about the Council’s contacts with him during its complaints process. We do not investigate Care Providers’ complaint-handling in isolation where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• investigation by us is unlikely to add to the Care Provider’s investigation nor achieve a different outcome; and
• there is not enough evidence of actions by the Care Provider amounting to fault to warrant us investigating; and
• we do not investigate providers’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman