Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council assessed her mother, Ms Y’s care needs. This is because any fault did not cause an injustice to Ms Y and any outstanding injustice to Ms X is insufficient to warrant further investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about how the Council has managed an assessment of her mother, Ms Y’s care needs. She says decisions about where Ms Y should live were financially driven rather than based on her needs and although the Council has now agreed Ms Y can remain in her current care home, its actions have caused her uncertainty and distress. She wants the Council to explain its actions, apologise and provide a financial remedy for the distress caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 injustice is not significant enough 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

5. In Autumn 2022, Ms Y moved to care home A for a period of respite care. She initially self-funded her care.
6. The Council began an assessment of her needs. It decided Ms Y did not have capacity to decide where she should live. It held a best interest meeting where it was decided Ms Y’s needs would be best met by continuing to live in a residential care setting. Ms X said she wanted Ms Y to continue living in care home A and care home A agreed to this. The Council advised Ms X to contact it again when Ms Y’s funds had reduced and she was approaching eligibility for financial support. Ms X estimated this would be around April 2023.
7. As it was soon to be responsible for funding Ms Y’s care, the Council considered the financial implications of Ms Y remaining in care home A, alongside its own finances and budgetary position. It considered other care homes in the area. It decided Ms Y’s needs could be met in a different care home, care home B and that care home B was the best value option for the Council. It told Ms X that it wanted Ms Y to move to care home B but if Ms X disagreed with this, she could consider paying a “top up” fee which would enable Ms Y to remain at care home A.
8. Ms X disagreed with this decision and complained to the Council. The Council negotiated with care home A who agreed to charge the Council a lower rate for Ms Y’s care. The Council agreed care home A now represented similar value to care home B and so it agreed to fund Ms Y’s care and for her to remain at care home A. Ms Y has remained at care home A ever since.
9. Ms X remained unhappy with how the Council managed the assessment process and how it reached its decisions.

My findings

10. Ms Y has remained at care home A which has continued to meet her care needs. Any fault in the Council’s actions has not caused Ms Y an injustice.
11. Ms X says the Council’s actions have caused her distress, but the Council is entitled to take into reasonable consideration its own finances and budgetary position when deciding how it will meet a person’s needs. Although I acknowledge Ms X found the process stressful and upsetting, the Council explained its decision making in its complaint response to Ms X, apologised if she had felt bullied and provided reassurance that Ms Y’s ongoing placement at care home A was secure. Any outstanding injustice is insufficient to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because any fault in the Council’s actions did not cause Ms Y a significant injustice and any outstanding injustice to Ms X is insufficient to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman