Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council did not inform the Department of Work and Pensions that Mr X had been admitted permanently to a residential care home. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr Z complains on behalf of his father, Mr X, that the Council did not inform the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) that Mr X had been admitted to a care home. Mr Z says that as a result, Mr X has been left in debt because he the DWP has overpaid some of his benefits. This has caused him and his family distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X used to live in rented accommodation. During a stay in hospital, discussions took place with a Council officer, Mr X and Mr Z about whether Mr X should be discharged to a residential care home. Mr X’s Council records indicate conversations took place several times where Mr X and Mr Z were told the care home placement would be chargeable.
6. Mr X moved into a care home. The Council carried out a financial assessment which determined how much Mr X could afford to contribute towards the costs of his care. Mr Z later complained he thought the Council contacted the DWP to tell it about Mr X’s changed circumstances and to ensure changes to his benefits were made to cover the costs of his care. Because this did not happen, the DWP overpaid Mr X some of his benefits which meant he went into debt.
7. The Council documented several conversations where it informed Mr Z he would have to pay something towards the costs of his care. It also carried out a financial assessment and sent this to Mr Z. This contained details of the benefits he received, any other income and the amount he would need to contribute towards his care. Mr X, or Mr Z acting on his behalf, was responsible for informing the DWP of any change in circumstances that would affect Mr X’s benefits. We will not therefore investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman