Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council charging him a contribution for his care and support and for failing to take into consideration his personal outgoings when completing his financial assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council charging him a contribution for his care and support. He says the Council failed to take into consideration his personal outgoings when completing his financial assessment.

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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. The Council completed a financial assessment for Mr X in February 2024. This Council confirmed it completed the assessment using information provided by Mr X and the Department of Work and Pensions.
6. The outcome of the assessment was that Mr X was required to contribute just over £32 per week towards the cost of his care and support.
7. In its complaint response, the Council confirmed it had reviewed the financial assessment and applied an additional disregard which had reduced his assessed contribution to just under £18 per week. The reduced charges were backdated to February 2024.
8. The care and support statutory guidance details what must be taken into account during a financial assessment. The guidance details that councils must ensure a person’s income is not reduced below a specified level after charges have been deducted. This is known as the minimum income guarantee (MIG).
9. The purpose of the MIG is to promote independence and social inclusion and to ensure the individual has sufficient funds to meet basic needs such as purchasing food, utility costs, or insurance. This must be after any housing costs such as rent. Therefore, the Council does not need to take account of personal outgoings as the MIG is disregarded from an individual’s weekly income to account for these costs.
10. I have reviewed the Council’s financial assessment and can see the Council has disregarded the MIG amount from Mr X’s weekly income. There is no evidence of any fault with how the Council completed Mr X’s financial assessment. Therefore, an investigation is not justified.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman