Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X complaint about a property disregard for social care charges and poor communication from the Council. This is because the Council has already addressed Mrs X’s concerns and a further investigation by us would not add anything to the Council’s responses or lead to a significantly different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about a lack of communication from the Council. She said the Council alleged she did not own half of her property with her mother, Mrs Y. She also said the Council alleged her father was not her real father.
2. Mrs X complained the Council told her three times the property she jointly owns with Mrs Y would be disregarded for care assessment purposes. Mrs X would like the Council to disregard the property and help pay for Mrs Y care costs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation: or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because a further investigation by us would not add anything to the Council’s responses or lead to a significantly different outcome.
8. The Council has already apologised to Mrs X for not answering or returning her phone calls and a delay in applying for a discretionary disregard for the property.
9. It apologised for the further delay in telling Mrs X that the application for the discretionary disregard was refused. The Council said it would remind staff of the importance of answering phone calls.
10. We also note the Council confirmed it accepts Mrs X jointly owns the property with Mrs Y. It apologised to Mrs X if its actions made her think the Council challenged her shared ownership of the property.
11. However, the Council confirmed Mrs Y’s share of the property does not have a discretionary disregard applied to it. It said Mrs Y is therefore liable to pay for full care costs because her capital, including her share of the property, exceeds the capital threshold set by the government.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation by us will not add anything to the Council’s responses or achieve a different outcome. The Council has apologised for its faults and confirmed Mrs Y’s share of the property does not have a discretionary disregard applied to it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman