Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not provided him with information concerning his brother. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we will find evidence of fault sufficient to warrant an investigation and Mr X cannot make complaints or act on behalf of his brother as he does not have the necessary authority to do so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council did not provide him with information about his brother’s whereabouts when his brother was moved to a different care home. Mr X says he has been prevented from seeing and contacting his brother and that the Council has delayed unreasonably in carrying out building works at his brother’s house which would enable his brother to move back home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I spoke to Mr X and reviewed the information he and the Council provided. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X’s brother, who I shall refer to as Mr Q, owns his own property. It has been in a poor state of repair, requiring work to make it safe to live in, and the Council has been involved trying to arrange funding for the work. While this matter was being pursued by the Council, it placed Mr Q in short-term extra care sheltered accommodation.
5. Subsequently, towards the end of last year, Council concerns about the deterioration of Mr Q’s health led to it arranging an emergency placement at another care home. The Council says it notified Mr X of this and invited him to attend its review of Mr Q’s case to take place the following week. The Council says Mr X declined this offer. Mr X says the Council did not invite him to this meeting. On completion of the review three days later, the Council contacted Mr X to tell him that a respite period had been arranged at the new care home to allow building works to be carried out at Mr Q’s house and for long-term planning for him to take place.
6. Mr X complained to the Council about matters relating to his brother, including its delay in carrying out the repair works at Mr Q’s house. The Council contacted Mr Q to see if he would give his consent for the Council to discuss matters with Mr X but it found Mr Q lacked capacity to give consent. The Council wrote to Mr X to tell him this.
7. Mr X contacted the Council again to complain that his contact and access to Mr Q had been restricted and that he was not allowed out with Mr Q to help Mr Q get money out of his bank account. The Council wrote to Mr X at the end of January 2020 to advise that as Mr Q did not have capacity to consent to Mr X acting on his behalf, it could not progress Mr X’s complaint which in the main concerned Mr Q’s property and Mr Q’s access to his bank account. It told Mr X it did not have evidence he was acting in Mr Q’s best interests and so closed his complaint.
8. The Council has advised that Mr Q has an advocate acting for him and that it is currently considering the ongoing support Mr Q needs in relation to his financial affairs. It says it will be making an application to the court for the Council to manage Mr Q’s financial affairs on his behalf.

Assessment

9. When the Council received Mr X’s initial complaint about the building works at Mr Q’s property, data protection regulations meant it properly sought Mr Q’s consent to communicate with Mr X about these matters. On establishing that Mr Q did not have capacity to give consent, the Council informed Mr X of this and explained why it could not respond to his complaint.
10. Mr X says the Council did not inform him of Mr Q’s whereabouts when he was moved to a different care home. However, the Council says it invited him to Mr Q’s review and told him where Mr Q had been moved to and Mr X has visited him there.
11. Mr X says the last time he visited Mr Q at the care home a discussion took place with the care home manager which led to him being barred and physically escorted off the premises. This is a new matter which has yet to be addressed by the Council. If Mr X wants to pursue it, he can make a formal complaint to the Council so, in accordance with the law, it can be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to it before we will consider it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we will find evidence of fault sufficient to warrant an investigation and Mr X cannot make complaints or act for his brother as he does not have the necessary authority to do so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman