Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s involvement in his mother’s care. We will not investigate this complaint as it relates to matters that have been decided by the Court of Protection.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council, as well as an advocacy service and a care provider the Council commissioned for his mother, Mrs Y. Mr X’s complaints include:
• the Council did not act on concerns the family raised in early 2017;
• the advocacy service advocated for Mrs Y to return home, which was not in her best interests; and
• the care provider did not involve the family in care planning and did not intervene properly in Mrs Y’s contact with her husband.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
3. The Courts have said that we cannot investigate a complaint about any action by a council, concerning a matter which is itself out of our jurisdiction. (R (on the application of M) v Commissioner for Local Administration [2006] EHWCC 2847 (Admin))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mr X provided when he complained to the Ombudsman.
5. I considered Mr X’s comments on a draft version of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X and other family members raised concerns to the Council in early 2017, relating to Mrs Y’s husband, with whom she lived. They raised further concerns in 2018. Mrs Y then moved into a care home.
7. The Court of Protection became involved to make decisions in Mrs Y’s best interests, about her residence and care. There were disagreements about Mrs Y’s best interests and her family members expressed conflicting views. The Council instructed an independent mental capacity advocate to ensure Mrs Y’s wishes and views were represented.
8. Mr X does not believe the advocate accurately represented Mrs Y’s best interests. Mr X was also dissatisfied with how Mrs Y’s residential placement handled contact between Mrs Y and her husband, and that it did not give the family members information about a care plan.
9. The Court of Protection considered the available information then made decisions in Mrs Y’s best interests. We cannot interfere in decisions made by the courts and we do not have the same powers as the courts to make decisions about a person’s best interests. We cannot consider what happened in court, which includes the content of reports presented as part of proceedings. The issues Mr X raised in his complaint to the Ombudsman are all inextricably linked to those proceedings, which themselves are out of our jurisdiction. The Courts have said that we cannot investigate a complaint about any action by a council (including services it commissions), concerning a matter which is itself out of our jurisdiction.
10. Mr X does not agree the complaint is intertwined with the court proceedings and says the issues are separable. Ultimately, this complaint concerns a disagreement about Mrs Y’s best interests. The Court of Protection took relevant information into account and decided where Mrs Y should live. The information available to it included all information about the family’s concerns. These events are inextricably linked to the decisions the court later made.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. This is because the Court of Protection has been involved to make decisions on the substantive issues, and the peripheral issues are inextricably linked to the substantive complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman