Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about bias by the Council when Mr B raised concerns about his mother’s adult social care. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr B says the Council is biased, acting in favour of his sister who is an alleged abuser. Mr B says when the Council does not take his reports seriously it causes him stress and leaves his mother vulnerable to further abuse.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr B is understandably concerned because his mother has changed her mind about her care provision, from what she had decided many years ago and had included on an advance care plan.
6. Mr B’s mother is of course entitled to change her mind if she has mental capacity to do so, but Mr B does not believe his mother has capacity to make decisions about her care and her finances.
7. A person does not lack capacity because of a particular health diagnosis. People can lack capacity to make some decisions but have capacity to make others. This ability can vary depending on a person's condition and how it changes over time, and on the nature of the decision to be made. For this reason, capacity is described as decision-specific and time-specific.
8. The Mental Capacity Act says you must assume a person has capacity to make a decision themselves, unless it is proved otherwise.
9. The Council met with Mr B’s mother following concerns he raised. The Council was satisfied Mr B’s mother has capacity to make her own decisions about her care and finances. Therefore, there was no reason for the Council to pursue any safeguarding action. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council made this decision, given it met Mr B’s mother in person and discussed the concerns.
10. I have seen no evidence of bias by the Council or of it not taking Mr B’s concerns seriously. When Mr B raised a concern about his mother’s welfare the Council acted on it by visiting his mother.
11. The Council’s record of that visit contains some statements by Mr B’s sister which he disagrees with. The Council also holds Mr B’s version of events on its file. Therefore, both party’s views are represented.
12. Mr B’s sister’s comments have not affected the Council’s view on what action to take, that has been directed by his mother.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman