Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about the standard of care in a care home up to December 2023. There is not a good reason for the delay in the matter being escalated to us. In any event, we could not achieve the outcome Ms X seeks. The Information Commissioner is best placed to consider Ms X’s request for information in 2025.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the care her late father (Mr Y) received up until late 2023. She said the Care Provider did not respond properly when she complained, and failed to investigate her concerns. She said she went to significant inconvenience visiting her father at the care home to ensure his care was up to standard, and said she has suffered significant distress.
2. Ms X wanted CQC to investigate the matter and carry out regulatory enforcement including enforcing a change of the Care Provider’s ownership.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
5. 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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X told us she had concerns about Mr Y’s care for the last four months of his life. This means she became aware of the matters she complains about as early as August 2023, and no later than December 2023, when Mr Y died.
9. The law says people must complain to us within 12 months of becoming aware of the issue, unless there are good reasons. Ms X brought this complaint to us in August 2025. Ms X’s complaint is late, and I have therefore considered whether there is good reason for the delay.
10. I have considered that Ms X was grieving during the relevant period. Ms X contacted the Local Authority (the Council) and the Care Quality Commission (CQC) about her concerns in January 2024. Given her grief did not prevent her contacting other bodies, it similarly would not have prevented her contacting us.
11. CQC contacted Ms X in February 2024 explaining it cannot investigate individual complaints. I have not seen the letter CQC sent to Ms X, but it likely signposted to us as the body that does so. The Council also closed its enquiry in April 2024. It would have been reasonable for Ms X to use the Care Provider’s formal complaints process at that point and then escalate the complaint to us.
12. Ms X has told us she struggles with technology. However, she has identified us in 2025 as the relevant body to escalate complaints about care providers, and could similarly have done so in early 2024. There is not a good reason for the period of delay between April 2024 and August 2025, during which the matter was left to lie. We will not therefore investigate this late complaint.
13. Ms X raises a more recent matter, relating to the Care Provider declining in 2025 to share a copy of its internal investigation with her. The Information Commissioner is the body best placed to consider complaints about how organisations handle requests for information. Given Mr X has died, such a request would be considered under the Freedom of information legislation. There is not a good reason for us to consider this matter instead.
14. Ms X told us the outcome she seeks from complaining to us is to have CQC take action using its regulatory powers. We have no power to tell CQC to take action against a Care Provider. We could not achieve the outcome Ms X seeks, even if we decided there was a good reason for the delay in her bringing the matter to us.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms X’s late complaint because there is not a good reason for the delay in the matter being brought to the Ombudsman. The Information Commissioner is best placed to consider a more recent matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman