Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr Z’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to vacate a legal charge on his late parents’ property or to cancel a debt for care charges of £80,000. This is because the complaint is late and there is no reason Mr Z could not have complained in or soon after 2007 when he first knew of the Council’s position.

The complaint

1. Mr Z says the Council failed to carry out a Continuing Health Care Assessment on his parents in 2006 and 2007. As a result, his parents were charged incorrectly for residential care, and a charge was put on their house. Mr Z says he is now unable to sell the house which he inherited when his parents died.

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, section 26B, as amended)
4. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr Z and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
7. I gave the complainant an opportunity to comment on a draft, and have considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

8. In 2007 Mr Z complained about a legal charge on the house owned by his parents after they died. The Council’s response to this was the charge was appropriate to secure payment of care charges. It said it would not disregard the value of the property as Mr Z had not lived in the house at the time his parents needed care, and it had not transferred into his ownership.
9. In 2021 Mr Z complained again about the legal charge as he said he had been unable to sell the house. He also complained the Council had failed to carry out a Continuing Healthcare Assessment on his parents in 2006 and 2007. The Council responded by saying the charge would not be removed and it was not responsible for carrying out Continuing Health Care (CHC) Assessments. The last statement is correct as it is for the National Health Service, usually the local Clinical Commissioning Group, to decide on CHC funding.
10. The complaint is late. We have clear evidence Mr Z was aware of the charge on the house in 2007, and of the Council’s decision on the outstanding care charges. There is no reason Mr X could not have complained to us then or soon after, rather than 14 years’ later.
11. Whilst Mr Z says he had health problems at the time when all of this was happening, the evidence clearly shows Mr Z disputed the charge at the time. Therefore, he could have brought the complaint to the Ombudsman shortly after.
12. It is also the case Mr Z’s dispute over whether the legal charge is valid, and whether the Council can recover the outstanding charges, is a matter for a court of law to decide.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late with no good reason for us to investigate it now, and the central issue is more properly for a court of law.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman