Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care provision because, it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about domiciliary care provided to his wife during her lifetime. Mr B says:
• A care worker consumed alcohol whilst at work.
• The care worker or Care Provider has been dishonest about how and why changes were made to the care rota.
• A care worker gave his wife gifts which were not requested or reciprocated.
• Care workers had a discussion during personal care, which totally excluded Mr B’s wife. This was unprofessional and against the Code of Practice.
• A care worker left his wife alone before he returned.
• Care workers have moved and broken items.
2. Mr B cannot find some of his wife’s jewellery and says some household items are broken. Mr B says the care worker must have seen the jewellery as it was often removed for personal washing. The Care Provider acting for the Council has refused to refund or replace the missing and damaged items. Mr B does not believe the Care Provider has done enough to discipline the care worker involved in most of what he complains about.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)
4. 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:

• 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council arranged a Care Provider to provide care at home to Mr B’s wife.
8. The Care Provider and Council have fully investigated the concerns Mr B raised. The Care Provider spoke with Mr B and the relevant care worker. The Care Provider accepted the care worker should not be consuming alcohol whilst working and dealt with this under its internal procedures. Details cannot be shared with Mr B because they are confidential between employer and employee. I understand this leaves Mr B with uncertainty about whether appropriate action was taken. We could not achieve anything further on this point as we cannot tell an employer how to discipline their employee, and we could not share any information with Mr B about any actions the company has taken.
9. The Care Provider and Council have appropriately investigated the concerns. The organisations could not conclude care workers had moved or broken any of the items Mr B refers to, so would not offer to compensate for such items. It is unlikely there would be available evidence for the Ombudsman to add to those investigations or to reach a different outcome. Most claims of loss or damage are best decided in court because there is usually no tangible evidence we could consider. The Care Provider directed Mr B to claim on his household insurance.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add to the investigations already completed or reach a different outcome. We cannot get involved in personnel matters so could not achieve any outcome regarding disciplinary action of the care worker.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman