Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision in November 2018 to treat his mother as having notional capital, when it decided she purposely deprived herself of assets to avoid paying for her care. We will not investigate this late complaint. There is not a good reason Mr X did not complain to us within 12 months of that decision and we could not now come to a fair or sound conclusion.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s assessment of his mother’s (Mrs Y’s) finances. It failed to recognise Mrs Y didn’t own a third of a property, as the family trust owned the property. He complains it therefore wrongly treated Mrs Y as having notional capital that she did not actually have any legal entitlement to.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mr X provided when he complained.
4. I considered Mr X’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. In 2017, Mrs Y transferred her property into a trust. This meant she was no longer legally entitled to capital from the property value, and she only had access to income from the trust. She later needed care, in 2018. The Council assessed her finances and decided her decision to move her property into a trust had been a deliberate act to deprive herself of assets in order to avoid future care costs. It therefore included a notional amount, equal to what Mrs Y would otherwise have had available for care, in her financial assessment. This meant she had to pay the full cost of her care.
6. Mr X asked the Council in November 2018 to reconsider its decision. He did not receive a decision from the Council. Mrs Y passed away in mid-2019. Mr X then formally complained to the Council in December 2019. The Council refused to consider the complaint, saying it was too late as it was about events of 2017.
7. The relevant date to consider, when deciding if this complaint is in time, is the Council’s decision of November 2018. Mr X did not know in 2017 the Council would later decide Mrs Y had deprived herself of assets. It is the decision of 2018 he complains about.
8. Mr X asked the Council in November 2018 to reconsider its decision. However, on hearing nothing further Mr X did not contact the Council again about the matter until December 2019, 13 months after his original request.
9. Mr X then complained to the Ombudsman at the end of January 2020. This was more than 14 months after the decision he complains about. I have considered his explanation of the Council’s lack of response to his request of November 2018. However, he could have complained to us in early 2019 and we could have considered the Council’s decision as well as its lack of response to his email of November 2019.
10. Given the time that has now passed, and there being no good reason it took so long for the complaint to be made to us, we should not consider this complaint. We could not say now what Mrs Y’s intentions were in 2017, and she has since passed away. We could not come to a sound and fair conclusion on this complaint if we decided to use our discretion to investigate it.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is late, and there is not a good reason to exercise our discretion to investigate it despite this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman