Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Council’s alarm and pendant service provided to Dr E. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Dr E complains about the way the Council charged him for care line services since August 2020. He said he asked Council run service for support to change batteries in his smoke alarm but did not receive help. Dr E says he does not know what the Council’s service is supposed to provide for the money he pays and feels he is overpaying for the service. Dr E wants the Council to check the payments he has made for the service and confirm what services it provides to him. He also wants the Council to repay extra payments it has charged him for and improve its standards.

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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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. Dr E said he had the Careline service installed in his property in August 2020. The Careline service is an alarm and pendant service run by the Council and supports adults who may feel vulnerable, have a disability or a long-term health condition. Members can access support and help by pressing a button.
6. Dr E complained to the Council about the Careline service as he said when he contacted the service to get help to change the batteries in his smoke alarm, he did not receive help. He also complained about the charges as he felt the Council was charging him more for the service than he had agreed.
7. The Council responded to the complaint in August 2025 and said Dr E had signed a service and equipment rental agreement when he joined the scheme. It said the agreement set out the service provision and charges which would be applied including any increases.
8. The Council told Dr E its staff did not maintain smoke alarms the Careline service had not installed and this was set out in the agreement. It said it would remind its team to alert landlords or a person’s next of kin if someone needed help with smoke alarms. It confirmed its billing team had contacted Dr E by telephone and email to explain why the charges increased annually as set out in the agreement.
9. We will not investigate Dr E’s complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. Any injustice is not enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Dr E’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman