Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about property disregard in the financial assessment for adult social care fees. This is because even though the complainant strongly disagrees with the Council’s decision, there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council has failed to disregard a property when assessing finances for contribution to adult social care costs of her relative, Ms C. Ms B says her brother, Mr D, lives at the property. Mr D is vulnerable and having to move would have an impact on his health.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, 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), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. When Ms C moved to a residential care home the Council must assess what, if anything, Ms C could afford to pay toward her care.
8. Ms C owns a property. Ms B says because Mr D is living at the property the Council should not include it in Ms C’s financial assessment.
9. The Council has considered the relevant law and guidance on the disregard of property in financial assessment for adult social care fees. The Council has completed two appeals, allowing Ms B enough opportunity to explain her case and provide any evidence. The Council’s decision was made by officers with relevant experience. The Council has properly explained its decision to Ms B of why it will not apply a mandatory or discretionary disregard of Ms C’s property.
10. The Ombudsman cannot decide whether a property disregard should be applied, we can only look at the process the Council followed to make its decision. So, although Ms B disagrees with the Council’s decision, there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision to justify an Ombudsman investigation.
11. The Council has offered a Deferred Payment Agreement, which means it would essentially loan Ms C the money to pay for her care fees. Therefore, Ms C would not need to sell her property and Mr D could continue to live there. But the money the Council loaned would need to be paid back once the property was sold.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman