Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s financial assessment. This is because her complaint is late and I have not exercised discretion to investigate it. If Mrs B disagrees with the Council’s most recent financial assessment for reasons she has not previously raised, it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Council against it.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs B, has complained about the Council’s financial assessment which calculated how much she must contribute to the costs of her care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the information Mrs B sent to us. I have given Mrs B an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs B told us she is registered as blind. She says she cannot understand why the Council has claimed it was unaware of her receiving income support as it was clearly marked on bank statements she showed at the first assessment. She says income support provides the legal minimum of income that a person is expected to live on. She wants the Council to recognise it has been in error for charging for her care. Mrs B told us she struggled to make four payments by cheque but social services told her they have not received them.
7. In July 2016 the Council assessed Mrs B’s contribution to the cost of her care was nil. On the following day the Council says Mrs B telephoned to tell one of its officers she did receive income support as a result of a claim her husband had made. She asked for a re-assessment. The Council says it completed a financial assessment in August 2016. This included Mrs B’s income support. The Council then wrote to Mrs B to say her contribution to the cost of her care would be £23.70. The Council says Mrs B did not appeal against that reassessment.
8. According to the Council’s records, Mrs B contacted its direct payments team in February 2017 about the change in her contribution and the officer explained the change. Mrs B contacted the Council again in December 2018 when after she had received a letter about her outstanding contributions.
9. Councils must act in line with the Government’s Guidance when carrying out financial assessments. The Council’s charges must not reduce a person’s income below a certain weekly amount which is known as the Minimum Income Guarantee. When the adult concerned is a member of a couple and one or both have attained pension credit age, the Minimum Income Guarantee in 2019 is £144.30. The Council must take account of any disability related expenditure, that is any extra expenditure the person has because of their disability. Councils will disregard disability related expenditure in their financial assessments.
10. It appears Mrs B was aware of her increased contributions by February 2017. People must bring their complaint to us within 12 months of the time they become aware of the issue they are complaining about, not within 12 months of completing the Council’s complaint process. So Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s assessment that she needed to contribute to the costs of her care is late.
11. We have discretion to investigate late complaints if there are good reasons to do so. I have decided not to exercise discretion in this case. Mrs B could have appealed to the Council against her financial assessments much sooner than she did and then complain to us if she was not happy with the Council’s response. If she disagrees with the Council’s most recent assessment for reasons she has not previously raised, she can appeal against it. It is reasonable for her to do so because the Council is best placed to resolve the matter in the first instance.
12. Mrs B’s bank statement should show if the cheques she wrote for the Council have been cashed. If they have been cashed, she can provide that evidence to the Council so that it has an opportunity to look into what has happened.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and I have not exercised discretion to investigate it. If Mrs B disagrees with the Council’s most recent financial assessment for reasons she has not previously raised, it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Council against it.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman