Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council gave incorrect advice about Carers Allowance. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council gave her incorrect information about claiming Carers Allowance after her son, Mr Y, went into a temporary residential placement. She said that led to overpayments by the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), which she now must repay. She said this has affected her mental health and caused her distress. She wants the Council to reimburse her the amount she owes the DWP.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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,
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In the Council’s complaint response, it said it told Mrs X during the financial assessment that Mr Y’s benefits would be affected when he went into respite. It said it contacted the DWP, so that his benefits would not be overpaid. It said at this time is telephoned Mrs X and told her she would not be entitled to Carers Allowance whilst he was in placement, and that she needed to contact DWP. It said Mrs X agreed to do this.
6. The Council accepted that in a telephone conversation with a different Officer, there was some confusion as the Officer offered to contact the DWP, if they had given Mrs X incorrect information. The Council said that in its view there was a misunderstanding in that conversation between Mrs X and the Officer. The Council apologised for any avoidable confusion caused by this. It offered Mrs X a remedy payment of £300. The Council also said it would consider whether it needed to improve its information for Benefit Appointees to provide further clarity around eligibility to benefits and provide refreshed training for Adult Social Care staff.
7. Although Mrs X is dissatisfied with the Council’s response, we will not investigate this complaint. It was Mrs X’s responsibility to contact the DWP about any change in circumstance that might affect her benefits. Additionally, the Council reminded her of this in a call in November 2023. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
8. The Council has apologised for any confusion caused in a different telephone conversation with Mrs X. The remedy it has offered is in line with our Guidance on Remedies. It has also made service improvements. Further investigation by the Ombudsman will not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman