Summary: The Ombudsman will discontinue investigation; to keep all complaint issues together. The Council failed to investigate the complaint Mrs C raised in January 2019 but will do so now.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mrs C, says the Council is bullying, harassing and threatening her. The Council took Mrs C to court regarding a dispute about an assessment of her daughter (Ms D’s) social care needs. Since then Mrs C says the Council has not complied with the court order, is working against her rather than with her, and has threatened to take her to court again. Mrs C complains about the Council’s actions before, during and after court.
2. Mrs C complains the Council has:
• Sent many e-mails at inappropriate hours and continued to send encrypted e-mails which she told it she could not open.
• Attempted to bully her into meetings and reviews with certain individuals.
• Threatened court action again.
• Not provided an appropriate personal budget to meet Ms D’s needs.
• Repeatedly said it needs to re-assess Ms D’s support needs, which goes against what was said in court where the Judge said Ms D needs a review not an assessment.
• Not got a record of the home assessment the court directed.
• Taken too long to complete Ms D’s review, and the review completed is not acceptable as does not have a proper understanding of Ms D’s autism and related behaviour. Mrs C believes the review should be completed by a specialist in autism, and doubts the Council has anyone appropriate. Mrs C suggests someone from the National Autistic Society completes the review.
• Failed to consider a complaint she made in January 2019, because she presented it in a large file.
• Sent a package to her house which it had not parcelled correctly. The parcel had been opened and confidential information disclosed.
3. Mrs C is disappointed with the Council’s behaviour and feels very stressed. Mrs C and her husband provide all support to Ms D, and need the Council to complete a proper review to provide an adequate package of support, to take the pressure off. Mrs C says the Council needs to work with them rather than against them. It is hard for Mrs C to find the time to keep explaining her complaint to the Council. This takes time away from her caring commitments to Ms D.

Back to top

What I have investigated

4. I have considered what happened after the court case. The end of this statement explains my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
7. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
8. If we are satisfied with a council’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

9. I considered information from Mrs C and the Council and spoke with both parties.

Back to top

What I found

10. Mrs C is the court appointed deputy for her daughter, Ms D. This means Mrs C makes decisions in Ms D’s best interests relating to her finances and health and welfare. Mrs C and her husband provide all care to Ms D.
11. Following a court case in 2018, Mrs C made a complaint to the Council in January 2019. Mrs C gave the Council a file full of information; she says the Council told her it will not read it as it is too much information.
12. The Council says it considers the file is the evidence to support Mrs C’s complaint. What the Council needs is to hear and understand from Mrs C what her complaint is. If the Council was to go through the file to identify the complaint it may pick out different issues to what Mrs C’s complaint is. This is a reasonable explanation from the Council; however Mrs C says she has had many conversations with the Council about her complaint and it has not understood and took the complaint forward.
13. The Council has not investigated Mrs C’s January 2019 complaint; that is fault. Mrs C has brought it to the Ombudsman after giving the Council a reasonable opportunity to consider it first.
14. Mrs C and her son then made a second complaint about the Council’s 2019 review of Ms D’s care and support needs. The Council has agreed a complaint resolution plan with Mrs C and her son and appointed an independent person to investigate the complaint.
15. The Council is willing to consider Mrs C’s complaint in full, regarding all concerns following the court case. In my view this is a sensible way forward, rather than having two complaints running concurrently that stem from the same issues. It is disappointing the Council did not arrange this sooner, and has caused some upset, time and trouble for Mrs C. It is positive the Council recognises this and is willing to take action to put it right. The Council wants to hear Mrs C’s concerns and ensure it considers them. This is surely the first step to rebuilding the relationship between the parties and moving forward, which is what Mrs C wants.
16. The Council will arrange to meet with Mrs C and her son to agree a complaint resolution plan. This plan will cover all issues the Council will investigate. The Council will appoint an independent person to conduct the investigation, which should reassure Mrs C that her complaint will be considered impartially. Mrs C and her son can meet with the independent person to discuss their concerns should they wish. The Council suggests it would be sensible for someone from the Council to also attend to ensure only issues relating to the complaint resolution plan are discussed; this would have to be with Mrs C’s agreement. If Mrs C prefers to meet the independent person alone, she should have that opportunity for the complaint investigation to remain independent and impartial. Once the Council hands the investigation over to the independent person, it is up to that person to conduct their investigation in the way they feel fit.
17. If the Council does not resolve the complaint, Mrs C can come back to the Ombudsman. We can then consider all issues together rather than separating the complaints. I would expect the Council to be able to complete the complaint investigation within six months, though this timescale may be extended with agreement between the parties.
18. I appreciate this may seem disappointing to Mrs C as she has already waited a year for the Council to investigate her concerns. However, the independent person would be fulfilling the same role as the Ombudsman, to look at the complaint impartially. It would be better for all concerned to have one investigation clearly setting out all issues.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I have discontinued investigation. Although the Council has had previous opportunity to consider the complaint, I believe it is sensible to keep all issues as one complaint and for the independent person to consider all issues. The Council should contact Mrs C as soon as possible to agree her complaint; her preference is telephone contact.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

20. I have not considered anything before or during the court case, even though Mrs C has concerns about those issues. Mrs C previously brought a complaint to the Ombudsman about the Council taking her to court; she withdrew the complaint. I cannot now re-open those issues. The Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to consider what happened in court, or issues that have been considered at court.
21. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is best placed to consider Mrs C’s concerns about the package that opened and disclosed confidential information. It is reasonable to expect Mrs C to complain to the ICO about that issue.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman