Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to start proceedings in the Court of Protection. This is because it is late.

The complaint

1. D Solicitors complained on behalf of Mrs Q. They said the London Borough of Sutton refused to apply to the Court of Protection (CoP) so that steps could be taken to protect Mrs Q’s mother. Mrs Q incurred significant legal fees when she took action in the CoP herself.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information D Solicitors provided. I considered Mrs Q’s and D Solicitors’ comments on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

5. Mrs Q’s elderly mother, Mrs B, lived with Mrs Q’s sister.
6. Mrs Q was concerned that her sister and brother were preventing their mother from seeing other family members, and that they were stealing her money. Mrs Q contacted the Council about this in 2016.
7. The Council conducted a safeguarding enquiry. It initially recommended that an application should be made to the CoP to enable it to take action for Mrs B’s benefit. But when it wrote to Mrs Q in January 2017 it said it would not apply to the CoP as the concerns she raised were private family matters.
8. Mrs Q did not agree that the concerns she raised with the Council were private family matters. Nevertheless, she took her own action in the CoP. The available information shows that by November 2017 the Council was Mrs B’s deputy. And by February 2018 the CoP had decided Mrs B should live in accommodation provided by the Council. Mrs Q continued with her own action in the CoP, seeking to become her mother’s deputy. In February 2019 the CoP dismissed her application.
9. D Solicitors complained to us on behalf of Mrs Q in September 2019. They do not think the complaint is late. They believe the 12 months referred to in paragraph 3 started when the CoP made its decision in February 2019. They said Mrs Q could not complain to us until the court proceedings finished.
10. Mrs Q strongly believes the Council should have gone to the CoP itself to protect her mother. She incurred significant legal fees pursuing her own action. She would like the Council to reimburse her fees and pay her compensation.

Assessment

11. We will not investigate this complaint.
12. D Solicitors believe Mrs Q had 12 months from the CoP’s February 2019 decision to bring her complaint to us. I do not agree. I say this because the alleged fault is that the Council’s January 2017 decision not to apply to the CoP – which resulted in Mrs Q taking her own action - was faulty. So for the complaint to be made on time, Mrs Q should have brought her complaint to us within 12 months of knowing the Council’s January 2017 decision.
13. In addition, the CoP decided later in 2017 that the Council should be Mrs B’s deputy. And by early 2018 it decided Mrs B should move into accommodation provided by the Council. Therefore, by early 2018 Mrs B was protected. This is what Mrs Q wanted. She did not need to await the CoP’s decision on her application to be her mother’s deputy or other matters before complaining to us.
14. So, as we did not receive Mrs Q’s complaint until September 2019, the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman