Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in carrying out a financial reassessment for his mother, Mrs Y, after her husband died. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s three month delay in carrying out a financial reassessment for his mother, Mrs Y, after her husband died. He said the delay in telling her what she had to pay towards the cost of her care meant she accrued back-dated charges, which caused her stress and worry. He also said she lost the chance to reduce the care package earlier.

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.

(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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

5. In March 2024, the Council wrote to Mr X to confirm Mrs Y did not need to contribute to the cost of her care, based on her income at the time. The letter said Mr X should tell the Council about any changes and that charges could be backdated to the date of the change.
6. In April 2024, Mrs Y’s husband died. Mr X told the Council that the amount of her state pension would change and she would recent a private pension, but the details were not yet known. Mr X said he was told the Council would review Mrs Y’s income and carry out a reassessment. The Council’s record of the call says it will carry out a reassessment when Mrs Y was receiving the extra income and recorded it would carry out a check on her benefits.
7. In July 2024, the Council identified Mrs Y was receiving the extra income and it carried out a reassessment. It wrote to Mr X to explain Mrs Y would need to contribute to the cost of her care from April 2024. The amount of the contribution changed several times to reflect changes in her income at different dates.
8. Mr X appealed the financial assessment and also made a formal complaint, but neither were upheld.

My assessment

9. As the Council said in its complaint response, it is the responsibility of the service user to tell it immediately about any changes to their income so it can charge them the correct amount for their care. That remained the case, even though the Council agreed to monitor her income by periodically checking with DWP.
10. There was no delay in carrying out a reassessment when the Council was notified of Mrs Y’s income, or in notifying Mr Y of the assessed contribution due. There is no complaint about the calculation of the assessed contribution and the Council was entitled to backdate this to the date Mrs Y’s income increased.
11. We will not investigate further because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman