Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council reversing its decision to fund the complainant’s late mother’s care costs. This is because the Council made clear its decision was provisional pending further assessment and there is insufficient evidence that is further assessment was subject to fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mrs Z) complains the Council assessed whether her late mother (Mrs X) was entitled to funding of her care needs, though a month later determined she was not and demanded the money back. Mrs Z says the Council’s reversed decision was on account of its assessment about gifts Mrs X made to her grandchildren when she was still alive. However, Mrs Z explains details about these gifts had been fully disclosed prior to the decision that Mrs X was entitled to part funding and therefore calls this into question.
2. In summary, Mrs Z explains the alledged fault has caused her significant stress. As a desired outcome, Mrs Z wants the Council to honour the original decision that Mrs X was entitled to funding.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 per-son 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 this. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I recognise the point made by Mrs Z that the Council said it would part fund Mrs X’s care. However, I found the financial assessment supporting this decision made clear it was provisional pending the assessment of gifts made by Mrs X to grandchildren while she was still receiving care and support. The Council subsequently did so and assessed that between 2011 and 2023, Mrs X gifted a total of £37,500 to her grandchildren.
6. The Council considered the amounts gifted in detail and against the statutory guidance. It determined that at the time of gifting the amounts, Mrs X had a reasonable expectation she would continue to require care and support and that she would need to contribute to the cost of this. The Council concluded that Mrs X made the gifts in order to reduce her available capital to avoid paying this cost.
7. I have not identified any fault with the Council’s consideration of this matter which is supported by detailed assessment consistent with the principals of the Care Act 2014 and statutory guidance. It is not my role to question the merits of a properly made decision and so we will not consider this matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

8. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restriction I outline at paragraph three (above) applies.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman