Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s communication when adult social care charges changed. The Council has apologised for the upset caused by not communicating with relevant representatives and is considering how to change process to ensure it communicates correctly in future. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken; it is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would achieve anything further.

The complaint

1. Ms F says the Council used an existing direct debit mandate to take several thousand pounds from her mother, Ms G’s, bank account. This left Ms G short of funds and worrying there would not be enough to pay the care home where she was living. Ms F and her sister were managing Ms G’s affairs and found it stressful. Ms F asks for an apology and financial remedy to account for Ms G’s debt until her home is sold.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. Ms G has died since Ms F first contacted the Ombudsman, so the circumstances have now changed.
3. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2), as amended)

4. Ms F says a solicitor is the personal representative of Ms G’s estate. Therefore, the solicitor would be the suitable person to raise a complaint about any financial impact to Ms G’s estate.
5. This complaint is only considering the impact on Ms F.
6. 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:

• any fault has not caused significant injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the complainant.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Ms F was power of attorney for Ms G’s property and finances during Ms G’s lifetime.
11. The Council accepts it should have shared invoices with Ms F that it sent to Ms G’s home address, even though Ms G was not living there. This would have prepared the family for the change in amounts the Council took by direct debit for the cost of Ms G’s care. The amounts had changed following changes in Ms G’s circumstances, as she had temporarily moved into a care home, which later became a permanent placement. These costs were different to what Ms G had previously paid for care at home.
12. The Council has already apologised to Ms F for the anxiety and upset its actions caused. The Council is reviewing its procedures for where it should send communication when a person using its services goes into a temporary care placement, and how it communicates with relevant representatives.
13. The Council’s actions acknowledge the impact on Ms F so there is no remaining injustice to her that would warrant investigation. I do not consider an Ombudsman investigation would achieve anything further.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms F’s complaint because the Council has taken satisfactory action to apologise for her distress and consider how it can improve future service. An Ombudsman investigation is unlikely to add to that or reach a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman