Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council mishandling a direct debit instruction to pay for Mr X’s sister’s care. This is because the Council has made a suitable offer to remedy the injustice caused by the delays and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council mishandled a direct debit instruction to pay for his sister’s care. He says this caused the debt to spiral out of control which caused his sister great distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

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. Mr X’s sister, Ms A, receives care. The Council completed a financial assessment to determine how much Ms A should contribute towards her care charges. Mr X and Ms A were aware she had to contribute towards the cost of her care.
6. Mr X believed a direct debit had been set up to pay for his sister’s care. He confirmed he had no access to her bank account to check payments were going out.
7. The Council accepted during its complaint consideration there was a significant delay in contacting Mr X about the arrears on Ms A’s account. The Council apologised for this and offered Mr X £500 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay. The Council also confirmed Ms A could pay the outstanding balance in instalments over time.
8. I am satisfied this is an appropriate and proportionate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay. I note Mr X’s view the charges should be waived. However, I do not consider this to be appropriate in the circumstances because the delay does not impact on the fact Ms A has to pay her assessed charges. In other words, if the Council had appropriately contacted Mr X without delay to inform him of the arrears, Ms A would still be in the same situation as she is now as she would still be required to pay her assessed charges.
9. The Council’s offer to waive £500 off the arrears is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies. Further, the Council has confirmed Ms A can pay for the arrears in instalments. This is appropriate as it allows Ms A to pay the debt in a sustainable manner over time.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has offered an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman