Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. It is unlikely that further investigation would lead to a different outcome. The Council has acknowledged and apologised for its errors.

The complaint

1. Mr B says the Council failed to protect his father’s (Mr C’s) possessions when he moved to a residential care home. The Council did not arrange for anyone to manage Mr C’s finances and there is a debt for care fees of over £8000. Mr B was estranged from Mr C but rekindled a relationship in the last year of Mr C’s life. Mr B says if the Council had passed on Mr C’s possessions to Mr C or Mr B then Mr B would have discovered he had a brother, and would have been able to tell him about their father’s death before the funeral. Mr B says the Council has threatened him with recovery action for the debt which is causing much stress.

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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

3. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2), as amended)

4. There was no personal representative for Mr C’s estate, we decided Mr B is suitable to bring the complaint. We cannot remedy any injustice to Mr C.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Care Act 2014 (section 14 and 17) provides a legal framework for charging for care and support. The charging rules for residential care are set out in the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and councils should have regard to the Care and Support Statutory Guidance.
8. When the Council arranges a care home placement, it must follow the regulations when completing a financial assessment to decide how much a person must pay towards the cost of their residential care.
9. The Council completed a financial assessment in accordance with the law and guidance and assessed Mr C could contribute towards the cost of his care.
10. Mr C could not manage his own finances, and there was nobody with legal standing to manage his finances. The Council says it applied to become financial deputy for Mr C, but he died before the process was complete. There may be some delay by the Council in starting the process, but that does not mean the care fees are not rightly due. The Council has apologised to Mr B for the distress caused by its failure to ensure someone was managing Mr C’s finances.
11. The Council wrote to Mr B about the debt because it thought he was now involved but said what action to take if he was not responsible for Mr C’s accounts. I understand this caused some distress to Mr B, and he may have thought the Council was going to ask him to pay the debt, but I do not consider it fault by the Council to send the letters. It was open to Mr B to contact the Council to discuss his concerns and get clarity on the situation and any debt recovery process.
12. Mr B is not responsible for Mr C’s debts, and the Council cannot claim money directly from Mr B. If there was money in Mr C’s bank account after his funeral expenses, then that should be paid to the Council to clear the debt in full or in part. If there is not enough money in Mr C’s bank account to cover all the debt, then the Council would waive the rest. This is an issue for Mr B and the Council to resolve, it is not an issue for the Ombudsman to decide.
13. The Council says when Mr C moved into a residential care home it protected his belongings in line with Section 47 of the Care Act 2014. This means the Council must take reasonable steps to prevent or mitigate the loss or damage of belongings, the Council can charge any reasonable expenses it incurs. The Council removed some belongings and stored them in a locked safe. Mr C’s landlord ended his tenancy and cleared the property. It is unclear why the Council did not protect all Mr C’s belongings, though had it done so would likely have resulted in a further debt for the cost of storing belongings Mr C was unlikely to need since moving into residential care. The Council has apologised that it did not check with Mr C whether he wanted any of his belongings. We cannot now know whether there was any significant injustice to Mr C and cannot offer any remedy to Mr C.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because the Council is correct to seek payment for Mr C’s contribution towards his care fees. There is some fault by the Council, but the debt is rightly due. The issue of whether there is sufficient money in Mr C’s bank account to pay any of the debt is not for the Ombudsman to determine.
15. I recognise the Councils actions have caused stress to Mr B. If the Council had become deputy for Mr C’s finances, then the care fees would have been paid during his lifetime and Mr B would not have had to deal with correspondence about the debt. The Council has acknowledged some fault, apologised to Mr B, and will take learning from this complaint to improve its future service. I do not consider that further investigation by the Ombudsman will lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman