The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the standard of care Mrs Y received in a nursing home. That is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
Miss X complained on behalf of her now deceased mother, Mrs Y. Miss X said the Council did not ensure Mrs Y’s care needs were met when it arranged care for her in a nursing home (the Home). She said Mrs Y was readmitted to hospital with dehydration and an infection.
Miss X also complained about the Council’s Telecare Service. She said she heard a voice speaking to Mrs Y through the system when it should not have; that the system did not alert her when Mrs Y fell, and that Telecare staff visited Mrs Y’s home to change the battery when she was admitted to hospital. Miss X wants the Council to investigate these concerns properly.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs Y was admitted into the Home from hospital. Mrs Y remained in the Home for a week before she was readmitted to hospital as she had become physically unwell. Miss X raised several concerns in her complaint to the Council. This included other residents entering Mrs Y’s room; availability of visits and the decline in Mrs Y’s health prior to her readmission into hospital. She said Mrs Y contracted an infection at the Home.
The Council’s complaint response said Mrs Y was unwell on admission and described her as ‘frail’. It said Mrs Y had entered the Home with an infection which the hospital had prescribed antibiotics for. It said she had dry chapped lips and neither of these conditions had developed whilst at the Home. It said the Home had monitored Mrs Y’s fluid intake throughout her stay and that a soon as it had concerns around her deteriorating health, it arranged for Mrs Y to be readmitted to hospital.
The Council said that no concerns were raised about other residents entering Mrs Y’s room when she was resident. It explained that some of the other residents were confused, however, they were closely supervised by staff. It said that it had an appointment system for visits and that Miss X arranged visits when there were available suitable slots. Other family members also visited.
Although Miss X is unhappy with the outcome of the Council’s investigation, I am satisfied it has properly considered and responded to her complaint. Therefore, we will not investigate, as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
We will also not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s Telecare Service. That is because there is nothing worthwhile to be achieved by investigating. Mrs Y is now deceased and no longer uses the system; therefore, even if she had experienced any injustice that now cannot be remedied.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman