Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the Council’s handling of a complaint about adult social care. This is because it concerns matters which are either late, outside our legal jurisdiction, or to which the Council has already responded appropriately, and so there is no worthwhile outcome to further investigation.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Mr B.
2. Mr B complains the Council did not respond to his formal complaint, about maladministration and discrimination by its adult social care department, in accordance with government regulations.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

7. Following a referral to the Council’s adult social care (ASC) department for a care needs assessment Mr B says, in June 2023, a team of staff from the local NHS trust visited him at home unannounced. He says this caused him significant psychological damage.
8. In May 2024 Mr B referred himself to the Council again for a care needs assessment.
9. In September Mr B made a complaint to the Council. At that point his complaint concerned the events of June 2023, alleging they were motivated by discrimination towards him because of his ethnicity and social class. In subsequent correspondence Mr B complained the Council had not carried out a care needs assessment in 2024, and that the Council had unlawfully terminated Mr B’s support from its advocacy service.
10. In January 2025 Mr B complained the Council had not responded to his complaint. We referred the matter back to the Council for it to investigate.
11. The Council responded to Mr B’s complaint in March 2025. The Council set out a chronology showing various unsuccessful attempts it had made to engage with Mr B and arrange a care needs assessment in 2023 and 2024, and did not uphold his complaint because of this. Similarly, the Council said it had not terminated Mr B’s support from its advocacy service, but that the service had closed its case because Mr B had declined to engage with it. The Council said it remained open to carrying out a care needs assessment for Mr B, and for making a further referral to its advocacy service if he wished.
12. Mr B referred his complaint back to the Ombudsman in May.

Back to top

Analysis

13. In his complaint to the Ombudsman, Mr B described the incident in June 2023, and in complaining to the Council about this, said it had thus far failed to comply with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
14. The Ombudsman’s code is not mandatory, and there is no evidence in the Council’s policy to show it has adopted it. I therefore cannot find fault on this basis. However, the Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009 give councils a deadline of six months to respond to a relevant complaint. Mr B made his complaint on 25 September 2024, and the Council responded on 10 March 2025, within six months.
15. I am conscious the Council’s response covers a different matter than the one Mr B originally raised in his complaint. The Council’s response addresses Mr B’s later complaint about the fact it had not completed a care assessment of him, whereas his complaint of September 2024 was about the visit to his property in June 2023.
16. It is unclear to me why this happened. I have not seen a full copy of the correspondence between Mr B and the Council during the period between his complaint and the Council’s response. But I also note that, when Mr B wrote to the Ombudsman after receiving the Council’s final response, he made no mention of this change in subject, and instead focussed on what he considered to be the Council’s breaches of the complaints procedure.
17. Either way, I am satisfied further investigation by the Ombudsman will add nothing of value here. The law says a person should approach the Ombudsman within 12 months of becoming aware of the matter they wish to complain about. Mr B first contacted us in October 2024, although at that point he was aware his complaint was premature. His first substantive approach to us was in January 2025, approximately 18 months after the incident with the NHS staff. This complaint is therefore late.
18. Even I exercised discretion to accept this complaint though, we have no jurisdiction to investigate the actions of the NHS. I have seen nothing in Mr B’s extensive correspondence to suggest the Council was responsible for this incident, despite his evident conviction it was.
19. With regard to the more recent matters, the Council have provided a copy of its case notes and other correspondence with Mr B, and this leaves me satisfied it has taken reasonable steps to engage with him to arrange a care needs assessment. It is not the Council’s fault it has so far been unable to complete this.
20. Mr B has also made consistent allegations the Council has discriminated against him because of his race and social class. However, the Ombudsman has no power to investigate such claims, which are matters of law for the relevant courts to consider.
21. Taking these points together, I do not consider there is anything meaningful to be gained by further investigation of Mr B’s complaint. For this reason I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Decision

22. I have discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman