Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council carried out a financial assessment for Ms X. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council relied on uncertain information and asked for disproportionate and intrusive financial information when it carried out its financial assessment for his mother, Ms X.
2. Mr Y says this has caused significant stress and anxiety and is seeking a reassessment.

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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council carried out a financial assessment to decide whether Ms X could contribute toward her care costs.
7. Mr Y has Power of Attorney for his mother. As such, the Council contacted Mr Y during its assessment to say Council Tax record showed Ms X had owned a property until recently.
8. Mr X disputed this information, saying his mother had never owned the property in question.
9. The Council asked Mr Y for evidence in support of what he had said – for instance evidence of rent payments. This was not provided.
10. The Council completed its financial assessment on the evidence it had, and decided Ms X can afford to pay the full cost of her care.
11. Mr Y complained the Council had relied on Council Tax records although there was doubt around them.
12. The Council reiterated Mr Y could provide further evidence the records it relied on are wrong, which he has since done.
13. Mr Y also complained the Council asked for evidence which was disproportionately intrusive. I have seen the Council accepted that as Ms X’s pension is paid directly into Mr Y’s bank account, he need not provide bank statements and can provide written confirmation of the funds he holds for Ms X instead.
14. The Council has been clear about the information it needs from Mr Y to carry out a reassessment.
15. I am satisfied Mr Y has had the opportunity to provide evidence to show the Council its records are incorrect, and the Council has agreed that given the circumstances he does not have to provide copies of his bank statements.
16. It is not likely that we would find fault if we were to investigate this complaint as the Council is entitled to rely on the evidence available to it.
17. Further, the Council has already said it will reassess Ms X’s finances if it is provided with the information it needs in order to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman