Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to investigate allegations against him before supporting an application made in the Court of Protection. This is because the complaint is late, and it was reasonable to expect Mr X to raise the matters he has complained about in a court of law.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained the Council supported an application made to the Court of Protection to have his deputyship over his wife Ms Y’s affairs passed to his stepson Mr Z. He says the Council supported this application without carrying an investigation. Mr X has also complained that when the Council raised a safeguarding concern, it refused to tell him who exactly had raised the issues in the first place. He only found out after he asked for minutes for the meetings.

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 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)
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)
5. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A (6) and 34B (8), as amended)
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the complaint provided by Mr X and the supporting documentation he provided. I also considered Mr X’s response to the Draft Decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. In March 2018 Mr X met the Council to discuss the issues raised at a recent safeguarding meeting. The concerns were that Mr X had disposed of jointly owned property, had told Ms Y that Mr Z had died and that he had tried to make Ms Y sign documents when she did not have the capacity to do so.
9. A few days later the Council produced a document in support of Mr Z’s application to the Court of Protection for him to be awarded deputyship for his mother, Ms Y.
10. In April 2018 the Council started an official safeguarding enquiry for Ms Y. Mr X told us the safeguarding documents alleged Mr X had financially abused Ms Y. They also stated that the person raising the concerns wished to stay anonymous.
11. Mr X’s complaint is late because he did not complain to us about what happened in 2018. The Ombudsman can only exercise discretion to investigate late complaints if there are good reasons to do so.
12. I have considered Mr X’s response to my Draft Decision this is an ongoing complaint. However, the issues Mr X is complaining about happened in 2018. I appreciate it may have taken the Council over nine weeks to investigate the allegations. However, Mr X would still have had enough time to bring the complaint to the Ombudsman within time as the law expects.
13. I am satisfied there are no good reasons to investigate this late complaint now. This is because it was reasonable to expect Mr X to raise his issues in the Court of protection when Mr Z applied for deputyship.
14. I appreciate Mr X’s view not all the issues he is raising were considered by the court and that the court initially lost his defence. However, the issues Mr X has raised are issues that he would have been reasonably expected to raise in court. The fact that they were for a different purpose does not make any difference to whether we can look at them as the key issues have been considered already. Moreover, we cannot consider documents that were submitted by the Council as part of a court hearing.
15. Mr X has further complained that the Council initially failed to provide him with the details of the person who raised the safeguarding concerns. He has said that he only found out the identity through the minutes from the meetings.
16. The Ombudsman will not investigate this matter as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to refer any information matter to the Information Commissioner’s office. Mr X’s view the ICO were of no use is not relevant. We still cannot consider this complaint because that body has specific powers and expertise to deal with concerns about access to data that we do not have.

Back to top

Final decision

17. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to investigate allegations against him before supporting an application made in the Court of Protection. This is because the complaint is late, and it was reasonable to expect Mr X to raise the matters he has complained about in a court of law.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman