Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s response to a carer having stolen her mother’s money. We will not investigate this late complaint as there is not a good reason Ms X did not complain to the Ombudsman sooner upon realising in 2018 the Council had not resolved the complaint to her satisfaction.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to resolve a disagreement about her late mother’s (Mrs Y’s) care costs. Mrs Y passed away in 2015, at which point it was discovered a carer from the Council-funded care provider had taken money from Mrs Y’s bank account.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered the information Ms X sent when she complained to us.
4. I considered Ms X’s comments on a draft version of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms X’s mother, Mrs Y, passed away in 2015. It was then discovered that a carer from a Council-funded care provider had taken money from Mrs Y’s bank account without authorisation. The amount taken was found to be at least £470, but the family believe it could have been as much as £800.
6. Ms X told the Council in 2016, when it sent a final invoice for Mrs Y’s care, that Mrs Y should not have to pay for care when she had been the victim of theft. She says the Council agreed verbally. She did not receive anything in writing to confirm the invoice was no longer in effect. She says she believed the issue had been resolved, so she did not have reason to complain to us at that time.
7. However, in 2018 the Council sent an invoice to Ms X which was not adjusted for the amount that had been taken from Mrs Y. Ms X complained formally to the Council. She says it then took far too long to respond to her complaint, and she had to chase it repeatedly. Ms X says because of the Council’s delays and the time and trouble she has gone to, the Council should waive the full final invoice.
8. The Council sent Ms X a letter in 2019 saying it would not waive the full invoice for care. However, it agreed to reduce the invoice by £470 to recognise Mrs Y had lost at least that amount. It explained the carer’s actions were a criminal matter and the Council and care provider had responded appropriately when the allegation was made.
9. Despite the delay by the Council in investigating Ms X’s complaint, I consider it would have been reasonable for her to have brought her complaint to the Ombudsman within 12 months of receiving the invoice in mid-2018. It has been four years since the family found out about the substantive issue, that is the carer having taken Mrs Y’s money.
10. I have considered that Ms X’s complaint is partly about the length of time the Council took to respond to her complaint, and so she is not responsible for the Council’s delay between 2018 and 2019. However, she could have contacted us sooner, if she had not received a satisfactory outcome 12 weeks after complaining to the Council. I am not convinced that Ms X has provided good reason to have waited over 12 months before then complaining to us. In the circumstances, there is not good reason to deviate from our standard practice which says complaints must be brought to us within a year.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this late complaint. This is because there is not a good reason Ms X did not complain to us sooner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman