Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council deciding her mother Ms Y owns a property so can contribute to her care fees, and it not properly considering evidence Mrs X provided to challenge the decision. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X is Ms Y’s daughter. Ms Y is elderly and has lived in a care home for several years. Mrs X complains the Council:
1. has wrongly determined Ms Y owns a property and so can contribute to her care fees;
2. failed to properly consider the evidence she submitted to challenge the decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered information from Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation has followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, even if someone disagrees with it.
6. Ms Y’s residence before moving to the care home was a former Council property and was bought under the national government’s ‘Right to Buy’ scheme. As Ms Y was the tenant, the scheme required her to be the named buyer. The Council considered information Mrs X provided about the ownership of the property. Officers noted Mrs X’s information about the circumstances surrounding the purchase. They considered Mrs X’s statements on her intention to remove Ms Y as the house’s owner several years after the purchase, noting this had not happened. Officers determined, based on the information Mrs X provided, that Ms Y is the registered owner of the property. As a result, officers decided the house is an asset owned by Ms Y and one which must be taken into account when determining whether she must contribute to her care fees.
7. The evidence shows Council officers considered the information Mrs X has been able to provide on the matter before they made their decision. They have not been persuaded by the evidence to disregard the registration of the property as being in Ms Y’s ownership and so disregard that property for care fee calculation purposes. That was a decision officers were entitled to make here. There is not enough evidence of fault in the officers’ decision-making process, nor in the decision reached, to warrant us investigating. We realise Mrs X disagrees with the decision. But it is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees
8. We note Mrs X considers the Council did not properly assess the evidence she submitted. She has highlighted errors in the Council’s response. For example, it refers to the property being mortgaged and the date of Ms Y’s will being written before the house purchase. Mrs X confirms the house was bought using a loan and Ms Y’s will was produced after it was bought. But these issues do not have a bearing on the key issue of the ownership of the property, so do not alter the core part of the Council’s decision affecting Ms Y’s care fee liability.
9. Mrs X says she was forced to use the Right to Buy scheme, which required Ms Y to be the listed owner. Ms Y as the tenant was the person who accrued a right to buy the house under the scheme. Right to Buy is the national government scheme which set the rules, not the Council. If Mrs X did not want Ms Y to be registered as the property’s owner, she could have bought a different house outside the scheme, albeit this is likely to have cost more. It is not fault for a council to apply and follow the Right to Buy scheme’s rules on registered ownership as set down by national government.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman