Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s late complaint about the actions of her son’s, Mr C’s, care provider or the Council’s safeguarding investigation into concerns she raised. This is because the complaint is late, Mrs B could have come to us sooner and there is no good reason to exercise discretion and disapply the law now.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained about the Council’s safeguarding investigation into concerns she raised in 2018 about her son’s, Mr C’s, care provider between 2015 and 2016. Mrs B says Mr C’s finances were mismanaged by the care provider and he had over £15,000 in his account in 2015 but by 2016 he was in debit over £2000. Mrs B says she was concerned about invoices in 2016 for clothing Mr C did not own amounting to over £400 and cash withdrawals at the same time when there was no full-time management in the home. Mrs B is also concerned about monies spent on wardrobes for Mr C’s room when he lacks capacity to make these decisions. Mrs B says the Council wrongly considered a period of time in 2015 in its safeguarding investigation when Mr C’s transactions were usual and failed to properly consider an assault on Mr C in 2016.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered the information and documentation Mrs B provided. I sent Mrs B a copy of my draft decision and considered her comments on it.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs B says she tried to pursue her concerns about Mr C’s finances with his care provider but did not receive a response from it. In 2018 she asked the Council to review the situation. The Council met with the care provider and Mrs B in 2018.
5. The Council considered the matter under its responsibility for safeguarding vulnerable adults. It says the Police advised Mrs B in May 2019 it was having no further involvement and there would be no further police action.
6. The Council concluded its safeguarding investigation and held an outcome meeting in January 2020. It explained it had investigated Mrs C’s finances for the period between January and June 2015 and found no evidence of financial mismanagement.
7. Mrs B complained and the Council responded in December 2020. It explained as advised in January from the sample and visits made there were no apparent errors or financial mismanagement. It advised Mrs B because of the time lapse between 2015 and now it would not revisit the situation and complete a historic review of Mr C’s finances. It confirmed in May 2019, the Police took no further action and was satisfied there was no mismanagement of Mr C’s finances.
8. Mrs B complained that the time frame for the sample of finances was not adequate and says the Council should investigate 2015 and 2016. The Council responded in February 2021. It further explained it will not complete an historic safeguarding investigation. It said it was reviewing matters that had already been investigated by other parties and events that happened some time ago. In addition to the timeliness issue, key people are no longer in post and the ability to investigate is limited.
9. The restriction outlined in paragraph two applies to this complaint because Mrs B complains about events that took place over a year ago. The Ombudsman has discretion and can disapply this rule if there are good reasons. I have decided not to exercise discretion to investigate this complaint for the following reasons:
10. The Council has explained, due to the time that has elapsed since 2015/16 key people are no longer in post and there has been a change of management since then so it will not investigate further. Mrs B says she was not aware of the problems regarding Mr C’s finances in 2015 and 2016 but at the latest, did know of them in 2018 when the Council considered them as a safeguarding matter. I consider it was reasonable for Mrs B to have come to the Ombudsman at that time rather than leaving it until now.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this late complaint. This is because Mrs B could have come to us sooner and there is no good reason to disapply the law in this case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman