Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councils assessment of Mr X’s care and support needs. There is not enough evidence of fault, and the Council has already apologised for an earlier miscommunication. Nor will we investigate a complaint relating to council tax liability, because Mr X has an alternative legal remedy for this.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not respond to him in a timely manner after asking for a care act assessment. Additionally, Mr X said the outcome of the assessment is not appropriate and does not provide the support he needs.
2. Mr X also said the lack of support from the Council led to him receiving court summons about a Council tax issue leading to financial hardship.
3. Alongside this, Mr X said the matters have caused him stress and anxiety.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against decisions on council tax liability and council tax support or reduction.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X complained the Council communicated poorly with him after asking for a care act assessment, which left him to feel the Council were not supporting him.
10. The Council acknowledged Mr X did not get a proper response and explained why this happened. The Council apologised, put forward a service improvement to prevent recurrence of this fault and confirmed an assessment was scheduled.
11. Further investigation of this part of Mr X’s complaint would not lead to a different outcome and therefore we will not investigate.
12. Mr X also complained about the outcome of his assessment and said the Council did not provide support in line with his needs. In its complaint response, the Council have detailed the different types of support offered to Mr X but noted he declined the support.
13. Based on the available evidence, the Council offered support it believed was appropriate following the assessment it carried out. This support remains available to Mr X. While Mr X disagrees with the suitability of the support offered, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our involvement. Therefore, we will not investigate this part of his complaint.
14. Finally, Mr X said the Council’s lack of support led to him receiving court summons related to a Council tax issue and believes the Council tax costs should be written off. The Valuation Tribunal deals with appeals against Council tax liability and it would be reasonable for Mr X to use this service because of this. Additionally, the service is free to use. Because of this, we will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we would not achieve a different outcome and there is not enough evidence of fault. Finally, Mr X has an appeal right to a tribunal to address his council tax issues.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman