Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to disregard Mr B’s property from his financial assessment. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr C complained about the way the Council considered his grandparents, Mr and Mrs B’s, property, when charging for care costs. Mr C says he moved in approximately eight years ago, initially to save money but it soon became apparent both grandparents needed him to care for them. Mr C says the Council incorrectly completed a Continuing Health Care (CHC) funding application and has ignored his appeals. Mr C says he provided care to both Mr and Mrs B, Mrs B until she moved into a care home in 2020, Mr B until he went into care in 2021. Mr C says the Council should agree to a discretionary disregard of the property because it is his permanent home, and he needs somewhere for his daughter to visit. Mr C says he is now suffering with depression and anxiety and unable to function because of the threat of being made homeless.

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 do not start an investigation if we decide 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.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council acknowledged Mr C had moved in with his grandparents in 2015 and assisted them until 2021 when Mr B went into residential care. The Council says Mr B did not give up a property to care for Mr and Mrs B as both received Council commissioned care to meet their needs and contributed towards the costs. Mr B also provided care for Mrs B so when he fell and was hospitalised in 2020, an emergency residential placement was found for her. The Council noted since April 2021 Mr B was the sole owner of the property and received a 25% single occupier Council Tax discount and also has a live Council Tax Benefit Claim. It said Mr C had not been registered at the property until recently.
6. The Council considered the supporting documentation Mr C provided and reviewed care records relating to the commissioned care Mr and Mrs B received. The Council considered the Care Act 2014 statutory guidance, annex B paragraph 42 which states:

A local authority may also use its discretion to apply a property disregard in other circumstances. However, the local authority will need to balance this discretion with ensuring a person’s assets are not maintained at public expense. An example where it may be appropriate to apply the disregard is where it is the sole residence of someone who has given up their own home in order to care for the person who is now in a care home or is perhaps the elderly companion of the person.

7. The Council satisfied itself Mr C had not given up his home to provide care to Mr and Mrs B but acknowledged he had assisted them when he was there. An appropriate level of care was provided to Mr and Mrs B by a care agency it commissioned. The Council confirmed Mr C is not in receipt of any disability benefits which might affect his ability to find work or accommodation in the future. It confirmed Mr B had been offered a deferred payment scheme so care charges will not be payable until after his death.
8. The Council has explained its reasons for refusing the discretionary disregard of Mr B’s property and we could not go behind this decision or comment on it unless there is evidence of fault. It is unlikely we would find evidence of fault even if we investigated.
9. Mr C says the Council has incorrectly completed an application for Continuing Health Care Funding (CHC).
10. It is not an administrative function of the Council to decide whether a person is eligible for CHC funding, nor can the Council decide not to provide CHC funding. In the absence of evidence from the NHS confirming Mr and Mrs B were eligible for CHC funding there is no fault with the Council for charging for care it provides.
11. If Mr C has evidence that either Mr B is or Mrs B would have been eligible for CHC funding he can ask the NHS to consider a retrospective application.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman