Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about funding of adult social care. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and Mrs X has not suffered significant injustice. Some of the issues complained about are better dealt with by the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains on behalf of Mrs X that the Council’s financial assessment incorrectly took property held in her name into account.
2. He also complains the financial assessment took place several months after care had started and Council staff wrongly told them Mrs X was entitled to financial support. He says invoicing was delayed.
3. Mr X says they cannot afford to pay for the care his wife needs.
4. He would like the Council to conduct a new financial assessment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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))

6. 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)
7. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
8. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
10. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

11. Mr X complains the Council wrongly included a property partly owned by Mrs X when it assessed how much she should contribute towards her care. Mr X says his parents were in the process of transferring the property into their names.
12. The Council says this transfer occurred after Mr and Mrs X became aware the property would be included in Mrs X’s financial assessment.
13. The Council’s financial assessment was informed by the Guidance, which says:

• the Council should consider if the person had reasonable expectation of needing to contribute to the cost of care, and
• whether avoiding care charges was a significant motivation in the timing of the disposal of the asset.

14. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
15. The Council was entitled to include property owned by Mrs X when it assessed her finances. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our investigation. Any further dispute about the decision would be a matter for a court of law to decide. I consider it reasonable to expect Mr and Mrs X to take the matter to court if they are dissatisfied with the outcome.
16. Mr X also complains the Council undertook the assessment after care was in place and says he was led to believe there would be no charge and the Council delayed invoicing. Mr X also says invoices were sent to the wrong address.
17. The Council has apologised for sending invoices to an old address. The Council says it informed Mr and Mrs X that they may need to pay towards the care. Information about possible charges is also available on the Council’s website. I understand Mr X disputes this and says they believed they would not have to contribute to the care. But most people will anticipate they would need to make a contribution to care, the absence of an assessment does not mean there would be no charge. Mrs X has also received the care she has been charged for. Therefore, I do not consider Mrs X suffered significant injustice because of the delay assessing her finances or sending invoices.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint on behalf of Mrs X’s because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and she has not suffered significant injustice. Some of the issues complained about would be better dealt with in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman