Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council and its assessors decide the care levels of residents at the property where he lives with Mrs X, and the Council’s response to his complaint. Even if the Council’s process involved fault, the matter does not cause a significant personal injustice to Mr or Mrs X to warrant us investigating. We do not investigate complaints about councils’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X and his wife Mrs X live in an ‘Extra Care’ property. All residents are placed there by the Council. The Council’s assessors band residents depending on their level of care needs, one being low, two being medium, and three being high need.
2. Mr X complains:
1. the Council downgrades people with higher needs to level one if their needs are met by someone other than a care provider and do not have a formal care package;
2. the Council failed to properly respond to his complaint.
3. Mr X says the downgrading of some residents’ care needs level makes it look like there are more residents with low needs than is actually the case. He says this has a negative impact on life at the property because potential residents with lower care needs are more likely to be overlooked for a placement. He says this in turn reduces social interaction with other residents as there is a greater proportion of people in the property with higher care needs. Mr X wants the Council to band residents using their actual care need level, not based on whether they have their care needs met by a care provider or someone else.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mr X, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. We recognise it may be frustrating for Mr X to not have more people with lower care needs in the property. But even if the way the Council’s assessors decide residents’ care level bandings were fault, it does not result in a significant personal injustice to Mr or Mrs X. The claimed impact of the Council’s banding method on the types of residents at the property does not cause them such an injustice which warrants us investigating. If the Council’s approach means a particular person with actual low‑level care needs is not placed at the property, it may be an injustice to that potential resident. But that is not Mr or Mrs X’s personal injustice.
7. Mr X also complains about the Council’s response to his complaint. We do not investigate councils’ complaint-handling in isolation where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• the core matter does not cause him or Mrs X such a significant personal injustice to justify us investigating; and
• we do not investigate councils’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the core matter which gave rise to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman