Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about Ms Y’s care and the associated charges. There is not a good reason for the delay in the matter being brought to the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mr X (Ms Y’s son-in-law) complained the Council:
• commissioned poor-quality and unsafe care in 2023;
• was biased as it investigated concerns about the family swiftly but did not properly consider concerns the family raised about the care provider;
• sent intimidating letters to Ms Y’s family about debt recovery; and
• did not properly deal with his concerns in 2023 or his complaint in 2024.
2. Mr X said the matter caused distress for Ms Y.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council or care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

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

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

Back to top

My assessment

Matters that are late

6. Mr X’s complaint is substantively about events he became aware of in mid-2023. The law says people must bring complaints to us within 12 months of becoming aware of the matter unless there are good reasons.
7. Mr X raised concerns with the Council about the quality of Ms Y’s care, safeguarding matters, and the care charges between May and August 2023. Mr X complained, and the Council signposted him to the Ombudsman to escalate the matter. He did not complain to us.
8. Mr X says in July 2023 the Council explained it would involve its quality assurance team to consider his concerns about the quality of Ms Y’s care. Ten months passed before Mr X took further action, and this was prompted by the Council sending a new demand for payment.
9. While it was reasonable for a short period for Mr X to believe a further response from the Council was imminent after the discussions of July 2023, it was open to him to chase the matter when he did not hear anything further, and it was reasonable for him to complain to us in late 2023. Mr X had no reason to believe the Council did not still consider Ms Y’s charges payable.
10. The Council signposted Mr X to us again in July and August 2024. Mr X complained to us in December 2024, a further four months later. There is not a good reason for the delays in the matter being brought to us and we will not now investigate the events of 2023.

Matters that are not late

11. Mr X’s complaints about the Council’s threat of legal action relating to unpaid care charges and its complaint-handling are not late. However, we will also not investigate these complaints.
12. Given that we will not investigate the events of 2023, we would not find fault with the Council’s decision to pursue Ms Y’s family more recently for the unpaid care fees. There is therefore insufficient evidence of fault to justify investigating this matter in isolation. It is open to the family to argue their case for non-payment as part of the legal process the Council has indicated it intends to take.
13. It is also not a good use of public resources to investigate complaint-handling alone when we are not investigating the substantive complaints.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s late complaint because there is not a good reason for the delays in the matter being brought to us.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman