Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to include appropriate day time support in his support plan.

Summary: Mrs B repeatedly complained to the Council that she could not afford the top-up charges for her separated husband’s residential care. The Council did not carry any assessment of Mrs B’s ability to pay the top-up long term and she was not given alternative options for Mr B’s care. The Council allowed the debt to continue to rise, which was fault. The Council agreed to waive the outstanding debt which remedies this complaint.

Summary: the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way in which the Council has communicated with the complainant regarding her brother. This is because we could not add anything further to the Council’s previous investigation. We will not investigate a complaint on behalf of her brother as there is no consent for us to do so.

Summary: The Council was at fault in how it arranged to fit a stair lift in Mr C’s home. It removed a handrail without fitting the stair lift, and Mr C fell on the stairs shortly afterwards. Mr C subsequently died in hospital, so the Council cannot remedy his injustice. However, it has agreed to pay his son, Mr B, £500 to recognise the avoidable distress caused.

Summary: Prestige Nursing Limited overcharged Mr D for the domiciliary care he received. It has agreed to refund the amount Mr D overpaid.

Summary: There is not enough evidence to say the Council failed to take all the action it needed to take to safeguard Mr Y in 2014.

Summary: There is no fault in the Council’s decision to charge Mrs Y for the cost of her care.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Council failed to meet her care needs. This is because it is unlikely he would find fault and he is satisfied with the Council’s actions.

Summary: the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to revoke the complainant’s blue badge. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs J’s complaint that the Council prevented support staff attending their disabled daughter’s birthday celebration, causing distress. It is unlikely we would find fault.

Summary: There has been serious delay how the Council has dealt with Mr X’s questions about its calculation of his mother-in-law, Mrs Y’s care costs. It has agreed to promptly apologise, answer his questions and offer to meet with him as he has requested. It has agreed to pay Mr X £250 for time and trouble caused by its delay.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council breached the Data Protection Act. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to deal with her complaint.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint the Council repeatedly misspelt her late father’s name. There is not a significant enough injustice to warrant the Ombudsman investigating.

Summary: The Council was at fault as staff at a care home failed to tell Mrs X’s family of falls she had in the weeks before her death. But this failure to inform was the only fault and it is unlikely to have affected the course of events.

Summary: Mr and Mrs A complain there was fault by the Council in the way it dealt with their request for adaptations to their kitchen to meet Mrs A’s needs. There is no evidence of fault by the Council and as it has offered a further assessment by an occupational therapist there are no grounds which warrant further investigation of the complaint by the Ombudsman.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr A’s complaint about lack of care he received from his provider, the Trust. This is because he purchased care from an unregulated care provider, so the Ombudsman cannot investigate his concerns.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr A’s complaint about the actions of the Council when assessing his needs. This is because it is unlikely he could add to the Council’s response or make a different finding even if he investigated.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about payment for transport from hospital. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: There is no evidence of fault when the Council decided that Mrs X should receive full-time bed based care when she lived at home, or when it decided that she should be discharged from hospital to a short term residential placement. When making both decisions it followed advice from medical professionals or specialists and complied with government guidance and legislation.