Summary: Now that Council has carried out a full review, the Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council failed to provide full information and advice about payment for care services. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsman’s involvement will lead to a significantly different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complained on behalf of his father, Mr A, that the Council failed to provide full information and advice about payment for care services. Mr B has spent time trying to find a resolution to an issue which has caused significant anxiety to his family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the information Mr B provided and spoken to him by telephone. I have given him an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. In his correspondence with the Council Mr B said he had first raised his concerns about Mr A’s financial assessment in May 2019. Mr B said the Council had taken an over-simplified approach to the assessment.
5. Mr B has complained that the Council failed to provide enough advice on what information was needed for an accurate assessment. He says he made attempts to get a proper review of the assessment without success, prompting his complaint to us.
6. Mr B continued his correspondence with the Council at the same time he complained to us. The Council subsequently apologised to him for is delay in completing a full review. The officer who carried out the review told Mr B he believes the Council’s initial financial assessment was correct. But, given how close Mr A’s savings were to the relevant capital threshold, his view was the Council should have completed a calculation estimating the date his savings would have fallen below £23,250. He apologised that this did not happen and he set out the relevant calculation in his review letter.
7. As a result of the review, Mr A’s contribution to the cost of his care reduced. The Council said it would make a refund. Mr B raised some further queries with the Council in February 2020 to which the Council responded. It is unlikely the Ombudsman’s involvement in this case will now lead to a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint now that the Council has carried out a full review. This is because it is unlikely the Ombudsman’s involvement will lead to a significantly different outcome.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman