Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision his mother deprived herself of assets to avoid paying care home fees. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to warrant us investigating. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an allegation of fraud; this is because an investigation by the Ombudsman could not add any further meaningful outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X is Mrs Z’s son. Mrs Z has lived in a care home for several years. Mrs Z transferred over £200,000 to a third party from the proceeds of the sale of her property. Mr X complained the Council:
• wrongly decided that Mrs Z’s financial transfer was an intentional deprivation of assets available to pay her care fees; and
• made an unsubstantiated allegation of fraud regarding Mrs Z.
2. Mr X wanted the Council to:
• reassess Mrs Z’s financial responsibilities regarding the sale of the property;
• disregard the monies transferred to a third party from the assessment of assets;
• contribute to the care home charges; and
• investigate and address the fraud allegations.

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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (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 and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Deprivation of assets

6. 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 if it were not for that fault, officers would have made a different decision. We consider the process a council has followed to make its decision. We cannot replace a council’s decision with our own or someone else's opinion if the decision was reached after following proper process.
7. In making its decision, the Council considered Mrs Z’s circumstances and the timing of the financial transfer. It also considered the explanations provided by
   Mr X and Mrs Z about the reason for the transfer but was unable to consider any contemporaneous evidence to support this, as none could be provided.
8. The Council gathered information about Mrs Z’s finances and applied the relevant policies and law when making its deprivation of assets decision. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process here to justify investigating.

Allegation of fraud

9. Mr X also complained that a social worker had made an unsubstantiated allegation of fraud regarding Mrs Z’s financial transfer.
10. The Council acknowledged this complaint and took steps to investigate this matter including:
• contacting the care home and owner of the care home;
• reviewing the file;
• requesting email correspondence; and
• contacting the social worker.
11. Whilst the Council was unable to find evidence of the allegation being made, it said it suspected the discussion referred to the deprivation of assets, rather than fraud. It confirmed it would:
• work with the social worker to reflect on the impact of the complaint;
• arrange for additional training; and
• arrange a change of social worker.
12. We will not investigate this matter as the Council has considered the concerns and taken steps to investigate and put things right. Investigation by the Ombudsman would not add any further meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision Mrs Z deprived herself of assets to avoid paying care home fees. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to warrant us investigating. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an allegation of fraud; this is because an investigation by the Ombudsman could not add any further meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman