Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a care support package. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X wants and the Information Commissioner’s Office would be better placed to consider part of Miss X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained to the Council that the level of support it provided was not sufficient. She also complained she was harassed during the assessment process.
2. Miss X said that it caused distress.
3. Miss X wants an increase in care or a backdated financial payment if an increase was not possible.

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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council assessed Miss X for a care and support package. Miss X complained that the assessment did not meet her needs. She asked the Council to increase her support or give a backdated payment from 2023 for the level of support she said she needed.
8. The Council investigated and offered to review of Miss X’s care package. Miss X said the Council harassed her for financial information.
9. In its complaint response, the Council said Miss X declined to complete the assessment. The Council offered to assess at a later date, Miss X declined this. The Council said it made itself available to Miss X so she could have a review.
10. We will not investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. The Council offered to carry out an assessment of Mis X’s needs and it was reasonable to expect the Council to ask for documentation to support its assessment.
11. The Council considered Miss X’s request for a back payment of care costs, it declined the request because it did not fund support retrospectively.
12. We will not investigate this part of the complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X wants. I have considered our guidance on remedies and the amount requested is beyond what we may recommend in this instance.
13. Miss X asked that we consider how the Council handled her request for information. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if they have a complaint about requests for information. We will not investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint because the ICO are better placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council assessed Miss X. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X wants, and the Information Commissioner’s Office would be better placed to consider part of Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman