Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his belongings being stolen in 2019. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains some of his belongings were stolen in 2019 when he was living in supported accommodation.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X seeks compensation for items he says were stolen from him in 2019 when he was living in supported accommodation. Mr X wrote to the care provider about this in 2019 setting out his intention to make a claim for compensation in court.
8. The Council has told Mr X it will not consider the matter now and has explained its reasons.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late. The law says a complaint should be made to us within 12 months of the person affected first becoming aware of the matter. Mr X has clearly been aware of this matter since 2019. I see no good grounds to exercise discretion to consider it now, 5 years later.
10. Further to this, it is unlikely we would have investigated this complaint even if it had been made in time. This is because we cannot consider complaints about crime. It is for the police to investigate and ultimately the courts to decide. We also could not decide whether the care provider was liable for Mr X’s losses. That would also be a matter for the courts to decide. Deciding about whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way at evidence as only the court can to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it lies outside our jurisdiction and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman