Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that her mother Mrs Y’s financial gifts to family members were deprivations of her assets required for care home fees. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision‑making process to warrant us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X is Mrs Y’s daughter. Mrs Y has lived in a care home for several years. Mrs Y gifted a total of £25,000 to her grandchildren. Mrs X complains the Council:
1. wrongly decided Mrs Y’s gifts were an intentional deprivation of her assets available to pay for her care fees;
2. did not take account of evidence of the pattern of previous gifts from Mrs Y to her family when making its deprivation of assets 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. We may only criticise a council’s decision where there is evidence of fault in its decision-making process and but for that fault officers would have made a different decision. So we consider the processes councils have followed to make their decisions. We cannot replace a council’s decision with our own or someone else’s opinion if the decision was reached after following proper process.
6. In making its deprivation of assets decision, the Council considered Mrs Y’s circumstances at the time of the gifts. Officers noted Mrs Y was in the care home when she made the gifts, so decided she would have been aware that her funds were already being used to pay for her care. Officers took account of other information they gathered from Mrs Y and her family on the reasons for the gifts and determined they amounted to an intentional deprivation of assets. Mrs X appealed against the Council’s decision. Officers reviewed their decision and considered the further information Mrs X provided about Mrs Y’s previous financial gifts. They determined this evidence did not demonstrate a pattern of gifting which warranted a change to their deprivation of assets decision.
7. Officers gathered information about Mrs Y’s finances and applied the relevant policies and law when making their deprivation of assets decision. They considered further evidence provided by Mrs X before making their decision. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process here to justify us going behind its decision and investigating. We recognise Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision. But it is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of Council fault to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman