Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to apply a property disregard during his mother’s financial assessment. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our involvement. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council providing inconsistent information during the financial assessment process because this did not cause a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s actions when it completed a financial assessment for his mother (Mrs Y). Mr X specifically complained that it:
1. failed to apply a property disregard for Mrs Y’s property, despite a relative, who is over 60 lives there; and
2. provided inconsistent information about the outcome of Mrs Y’s financial assessment.
2. Mr X said this caused significant distress and anxiety for the family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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.

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

4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs Y was discharged from hospital in August 2025 and moved into Mr X’s home because she had care needs. Before this, Mrs Y lived in her own property, which she owns, with another family member who is over 60.
8. The Council began a financial assessment to decide what contribution, if any, Mrs Y make towards her care costs.
9. In September 2025 the Council contacted Mr X about the outcome of the assessment. It said it would not apply a property disregard to Mrs Y’s own property, which she lived in before her hospital discharge. This is because it did not consider it to be Mrs Y’s main and only home, given she now lived with Mr X.
10. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance states that an authority should disregard the value of a person’s main or only home during a financial assessment, in various circumstances. This includes where a relative of the person, who is aged 60 or over lives in the property.
11. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decision not to agree a property disregard is correct. We can consider the decision-making process but, unless there was fault in that process, we cannot comment on the decision reached.
12. The available evidence suggests we would be unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision-making about Mrs Y’s property not being her main and only home and therefore that the property disregard did not apply. The Council appears to have acted in line with statutory guidance. It also clearly communicated this decision with Mr X. For this reason, we will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint.
13. Mr X also complained the Council provided inconsistent information about the outcome of Mrs Y’s assessment. The Council wrote to him to say Mrs Y would not have to contribute to her care costs, despite already being told she would have to contribute.
14. When Mr X raised this with the Council, it apologised and confirmed this was incorrect and went on to write to Mr X with the correct contribution amount.
15. While this likely caused frustration to Mr X and Mrs Y, I am not satisfied this caused a significant enough injustice to warrant a full Ombudsman investigation and therefore we will not investigate.
16. Our role is to investigate complaints where fault has caused injustice and where we can realistically achieve a meaningful remedy, to put the person back in the position where they would have been, if but for the fault alleged. In this case, the Council have already apologised and clarified the contribution Mrs Y needs to make.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. For the remainder of his complaint, the Council’s actions did not cause a significant enough injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman