Summary: the Council was at fault because it did not consult Mr Y’s appointed attorney when it carried out the annual review of his care package or discuss the proposed change with him. However this fault did not affect the outcome of the review. The Council decided to remove part of the care package for Mr Y to have access to the community because he was no longer able to leave his home and was cared for in bed.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care provided to Mrs Y in a care home. The Council has accepted it was at fault and agreed to pay the complainants a suitable financial remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about safeguarding action taken by the Council. This is because it concerns events that took place more than 12 months ago and there is no good reason to investigate events which took place this long ago. In addition, if we were to exercise discretion we would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s adult social care needs. Mr X complains the Council did not complete his needs assessment properly. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault with the way the Council complete Mr X’s care and support assessment.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a discharge assessment and of the Council charging Mr X for his nursing home placement. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council unfairly charging Mr X for care and support. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to carry out a safeguarding investigation more than a year after receiving the referral. We could not come to sound conclusions at this time, until the Council has finished its enquiries.

Summary: The Council has acknowledged there were some faults in the way it managed the Direct Payments for Ms X’s social care. It accepted the findings of an independent investigation and has implemented the recommendations (including service improvements) which arose from that.

Summary: There was fault in the care that was provided to Mr C and there was poor communication relating to the safeguarding enquiries into the care. Both councils have agreed to apologise, to pay a financial remedy and to remind staff of the importance of involving the person at the centre of a safeguarding enquiry in the enquiry.

Summary: The care provider did not always provide a good and safe standard of treatment to Mrs X. Although some concerns were addressed after Mrs A’s complaint, the care provider will now acknowledge the outstanding injustice.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to deal properly with his request for a carer’s grant, leaving him without the support he needs as his mother’s carer. The Council failed to deal properly with his carer’s grant in 2021 and failed to communicate properly with him later that year, resulting in him missing out on the opportunity to be considered for a carer’s grant in 2022. The Council needs to apologise and make a symbolic payment.

Summary: There was fault by the Care Provider, acting for the Council, in its home care to Mrs Y, missed and late calls, a failure to keep appropriate records and a failure by the Council to make timely referrals for assessments for specialist equipment. The complaint response was also poor. This fault caused avoidable distress and an increased risk of harm to Mrs Y and avoidable distress to Mrs X who had to step in to provide care. The Council will apologise, make payments and take action to improve services including training and quality monitoring.

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to respond to concerns she raised about her son’s direct payments account. We found the Council failed to properly administer the direct payments account and there was significant delay in the Council’s response to Mrs X’s queries and complaint. The Council agreed to put the errors right and make a payment to reflect the added time trouble and distress the matter caused.

Summary: We found fault by the Council as it failed to notify the ICB when Mrs B’s funding arrangements changed. This caused her family unnecessary confusion. The Council will apologise for this.

Summary: Mr F complained about the way the Council and the Trust dealt with his late father’s discharge from hospital and arranged a homecare agency to start support. He also complained about the loss of his father’s jewellery when he was admitted to hospital in December 2020. We found fault in the way the Council arranged homecare support as Mr F’s father was left without support on the day of his discharge. This caused Mr F avoidable distress. The Trust did not ensure a property list was completed when Mr F’s father went into hospital. Because of this Mr F is left with uncertainty about what happened to his father’s jewellery. The Council and the Trust have agreed to our recommendations and will apologise to Mr F and improve. The Council and the Trust will also make symbolic payments to acknowledge the injustice caused to Mr F.

Summary: There was fault in the care that was provided to Mr C and there was poor communication relating to the safeguarding enquiries into the care. Both councils have agreed to apologise, to pay a financial remedy and to remind staff of the importance of involving the person at the centre of a safeguarding enquiry in the enquiry.

Summary: Mr X, complains the Council is failing to meet his needs since changing his social worker, leaving him without the support he needs. He wants the Council to give him the same social worker as before. We have discontinued the investigation into this complaint, as we cannot deliver the outcome he is looking for.

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of his son Mr Z about the actions of a care provider. We cannot investigate this complaint as the NHS funded Mr Z’s care.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about @.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council seeking payment of fees relating to his mother Mrs Y’s care in 2020. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate it now.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the care provider for his mother Mrs Y incorrectly recording her weight loss and risk from malnutrition. There is no different outcome an investigation would achieve which warrants an investigation. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to Mr X or Mrs Y by the matters complained of to justify investigating.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council assessed her mother, Ms Y’s care needs. This is because any fault did not cause an injustice to Ms Y and any outstanding injustice to Ms X is insufficient to warrant further investigation.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council pursued him for payment of his relative, Mrs Y’s, care fees. He says the Council wrongly said he received Mrs Y’s pension and benefits. He also says the Council pressured him into applying for deputyship and revoking his appointeeship. Mr B says he could not afford the care fees or the fee for the deputyship application, and the way the Council managed the matter caused him distress and anxiety. We do not find fault in the Council sending invoices for the care fees and encouraging Mr B to apply for deputyship. However, we find fault in how the Council addressed its concerns about Mr B’s management of the appointeeship. The Council has agreed to act to put right the injustice to Mr B.

Summary: The complainant, Miss Y, complained the Council failed to understand her care needs and provide the support she needs to meet them. We are satisfied the Council considered all relevant evidence and followed the proper procedures when carrying out Miss Y’s care needs assessment and the following review. Therefore, we do not find the Council at fault.

Summary: Ms B complained that the Council failed to provide flooring and decoration in her property following Disabled Facilities Grant works to create a ground floor living space for her. She had to borrow the money to complete the work which has caused her significant distress. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not listening to Ms X’s son’s wishes for her to be his main carer, and to pay her long term for the care and support she provides to her son. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Summary: The Council was not at fault for how it explained and arranged Mrs X’s care charges. However, it was at fault for a delay in sending out her financial assessment forms. This meant her daughter received a much bigger bill than she would have if there had been no delay. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused, and explain how it will avoid similar delays in future.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council sending an invoice to Mr X’s grandmother. He said the Council told him it would cancel the invoice, but then later sent his grandmother more invoices. This is because the Council has appropriately remedied the injustice caused by the fault identified and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care, because Ms B is not a suitable representative to raise a complaint for Ms C. We would not investigate a councils complaint handling where we are not investigating the substantive matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the standard of care provided to Mrs X’s father while at a care home. This is because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mrs X and her father.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s safeguarding investigation at this time. The Council has not yet completed its enquiries and so currently we could not properly consider the outcome and any potential injustice.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed carrying out adaptations required by his mother, Ms Y, to meet her care needs. The Council was at fault for the delay in carrying out the adaptations and for poor communication. It has agreed to apologise to Mrs Y and pay her £3850 to acknowledge the distress, frustration and impact upon Mrs Y’s dignity this caused. It has also agreed to review its procedures.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint that the Council refused to pay the full cost of her mother, Mrs M’s, care. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation and in any case, Mrs M has not experienced an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s commissioned care for her late mother Mrs Y and how it considered her complaint. Investigation would not add to the Council’s investigation or achieve a different outcome. We cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs X seeks. We do not investigate councils’ complaint handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care provided to Mrs Y by a domiciliary care agency and the Council’s safeguarding involvement. We cannot achieve a meaningful outcome for Mr X and we could not add to the previous investigations.

Summary: The care provided to Mrs Y in a residential care home fell short of expected standards. I am satisfied this has been properly investigated by the relevant Council under safeguarding. I do not consider the Care Provider’s complaint response to be adequate because it lacks an apology for the faults identified and fails to acknowledge the distress caused to Mrs Y’s representative.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care assessment, because there is not enough evidence of fault or a significant injustice to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council officer’s conduct during two telephone calls. It is unlikely we would find sufficient evidence of fault by the Council.