Summary: We will not investigate this complaint in connection with services received by Mr X at a day centre in 2019. This is because the complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints and there are no good reasons for investigating. Even if we exercised discretion it is unlikely, we could achieve anything due to the passage of time.

The complaint

1. In short, Mr X complains, via his advocate, about the Council’s failure to respond to his complaint about financial charges and services he received at a day centre in 2019. He says the Council’s lack of a response affected his mental health adversely and contributed to him feeling suicidal.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. 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 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

6. In summary, Mr X complained to the Council in 2020 about not receiving services at a day centre sufficiently in accordance with his care plan. He also said staff were unprofessional and bullied other service users. And said he was not informed he would be charged.

7. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s complaint in 2020 but failed to respond.
8. Mr X chased the matter up nearly two years later in 2022.
9. The Council responded by apologising for the lack of response in 2020. But it said it could not investigate now due to the elapsed time.
10. The Council explained the complaints officer who originally dealt with the matter had left the Council’s employment so it could check the reasons they failed to respond. It also noted Mr X had been in contact with the Council but not chased up this issue before.
11. In these circumstances, we will not exercise discretion to investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to respond in 2020. This is because he was aware of the problem more than 12 months before he complained to us. And while I sympathise with Mr X’s poor health, there are no good reasons to investigate now. Even if we were to exercise discretion to investigate, it is unlikely we could achieve anything given faded memories due to the passage of time and also staff turnover.

Back to top

Final decision

12. There are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate this late complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to Mr X’s complaint from 2020. As Mr X could have complained to us sooner than he has. And, even if we were to exercise discretion it is unlikely we could achieve anything.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman