Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the care firm commissioned by the Council to provide home care to her late relatives Mr and Mrs Y, and the firm’s lack of responses to her complaint. The loss of Mr and Mrs Y’s money to one of the carers, Mr Z, has been determined by the courts and we cannot achieve a different outcome. Any complaint about the care provision is late and there is no good reason to investigate it now. We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks. We do not investigate council or care providers’ complaint communications where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X is the relative of a couple Mr and Mrs Y. The Council commissioned a home care provider for them in 2019. Mr and Mrs Y have since died.
2. Mrs X complains:
1. the Council commissioned a care provider which sent to the couple’s home a carer, Mr Z, who was a convicted criminal;
2. the care provider has not replied to her emails on the matter.
3. Mrs X says Mr Z stole all Mr and Mrs Y’s money. She says she and her husband have had 18 months of stress from the matter, including from chasing the care provider for responses. She says they have gone through police enquiries, court appearances and negotiations with Mr and Mrs Y’s bank.
4. Mrs X wants an apology, the care firm to convince her it is properly vetting its staff, and for the care fees to be paid back.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
6. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
7. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
8. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

9. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council or care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered information from Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

11. Mr Z was one of three staff provided as home carers to Mr and Mrs Y in 2019. The care provider sacked him in March 2020 but Mr Z continued to visit Mr and Mrs Y. Mr Y died in late 2020 and Mrs Y went into sheltered accommodation in early 2021. Mrs Y died about five months after she moved to the accommodation.
12. I understand Mrs X believes the care provider was at fault for employing Mr Z and sending him as a carer to Mr and Mrs Y’s house. We could not now say the theft from Mr and Mrs Y was caused by actions of the care provider commissioned by the Council. The financial loss Mr and Mrs Y incurred was the direct result of Mr Z’s criminal actions. The courts have tried and convicted Mr Z for this. There is no different outcome an Ombudsman investigation could now achieve here. Mrs X may consider the court should have made a ruling to include a financial remedy to her or Mr and Mrs Y’s wider family as part of the judgement. But that is a matter which could have been raised for consideration in the court proceedings. We do not have powers to investigate what happened in court, nor can we add to or interfere in its findings and rulings.
13. I recognise the events surrounding the investigation, trial and conviction of Mr Z, and the work involved with Mr and Mrs Y’s finances, would have been distressing and stressful for Mrs X and wider family. But these injustices stem from the actions of Mr Z, not from actions of the care provider or the Council.
14. The financial outcome Mrs X seeks is the reimbursement of the care fees Mr and Mrs Y paid. But that service ended at the latest in mid-2021 on Mrs Y’s death. Mr Z could not have been providing any official service commissioned from the care provider from March 2020 onwards because the care firm sacked him then. We expect people to complain to us within 12 months of becoming aware of the matter complained of. Mrs X complained to us in February 2023, over 18 months after any official home service would have ended. The complaint is therefore late. I have gone on to consider whether there is good reason to investigate this late complaint now. We could not now find the care provided to Mr and Mrs Y, then later just to Mrs Y, involved fault, or that they were not given the care which met their assessed needs by the care provider. Even if we could make a finding on the care now, any fees incurred for the care were paid by Mr and Mrs Y. We could not now provide them with a remedy for that since their deaths. There is no good reason for us to investigate this part of the complaint now. This means we also cannot achieve this outcome Mrs X seeks from her complaint, which is a further reason for us not to investigate.
15. I note Mrs X also wants the care firm to convince her it is properly vetting its staff. It is for the relevant regulatory authorities, such as the Care Quality Commission (CQC), to be satisfied with the actions of the care firm, including its staff vetting. In the event Mrs X believes the legal action has not brought this matter to the attention of the authorities, she may wish to refer it to the CQC.
16. Mrs X says the care provider has not replied to her emails and complaints. We do not investigate complaint and other correspondence issues in isolation where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this aspect of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• the core issue of the responsibility for the loss of Mr and Mrs Y’s money has been determined by the courts and we have no powers to change or add to that outcome; and
• any complaint about the care provision is late and there is no good reason to investigate it now; and
• we cannot achieve the financial outcome Mrs X seeks from the complaint; and
• we do not investigate council or care providers’ complaint communications where we are not investigating the core issues which gave rise to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman