Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council wrongly invoicing Mr C’s sister for his late mother’s, Mrs B’s, care. This is because the Council has acknowledged its failings in this case, reimbursed money Mrs B should not have paid, apologised to Mr C and his sister, and offered him £500 for the time and trouble he has incurred in pursuing his complaint. We could achieve no more than this if we investigated and are satisfied the injustice caused by the fault has been remedied.

The complaint

1. Mr C complained about the process he had to go through and the time it took the Council to consider his complaint about wrongly invoicing his sister instead of him for his late mother’s care, monies which she did not owe. Mr C says the Council has not been transparent or followed its own protocols, processes or procedures which has caused anxiety, distress and upset. Mr C says he wants a written guarantee no other family will have to go through what they have.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council apologised to Mr C and his sister for invoicing Mrs B for care she should not have been invoiced for and reimbursed £1889.91; the amount Mrs B paid. There were errors in the way the Council communicated with Mr C and the Council acknowledged this in its investigation. It also agreed to pay Mr C £250 for the time and trouble he incurred in pursuing his complaint and a further £250, it says, as a symbolic gesture.
6. While Mr C says the Council has not answered all of his queries and concerns about processes it is not the role of the Ombudsman to provide these. Neither the Council nor the Ombudsman could give Mr C a written guarantee this would not happen again. We are satisfied the Council has investigated Mr C’s complaint, apologised for the failings, advised it has informed Social Workers to inform relatives/next of kins about communication with families, paid monies owed to the late Mrs B’s estate and offered Mr C £500 for time trouble and distress he has encountered in having to pursue a complaint. There is no unremedied injustice warranting an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman