Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s support to Mr Y (deceased). This is because the issues Miss X complained of are more than 12 months old and there are no good reasons why she did not complain sooner. We also would not be able to achieve what Miss X wants and there is another body better placed to consider part of her complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council poorly supported Mr Y (deceased) when it provided him with domiciliary care. She said the Council:
• delayed providing Mr Y with a social worker;
• did not complete an assessment of Mr Y’s mental capacity;
• did not support Mr Y with maintaining contact with his family;
• failed to take appropriate action to protect him from financial abuse; and
• did not take any action when the Care Provider’s home visits to Mr Y were missed or late.
2. Miss X said it caused her distress, frustration and uncertainty as had the Council taken appropriate action at the time of providing care to Mr Y, Mr Y could have avoided harm. Miss X wants the Council to amend the outstanding care bill, provide her with a financial remedy, refer the matter to the police and make service improvements to prevent a recurrence of fault.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
4. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Miss X.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In Summer 2022, Mr Y had a stay in hospital. At the time of Mr Y’s admission, he was experiencing symptoms of delirium. Between July and August 2022, the Council’s social worker visited Mr Y at the hospital to discuss plans for discharge.
8. The hospital discharged Mr Y to his home. The Council arranged a package of care for Mr Y in the form of domiciliary care. Mr Y self-funded the package of care. In early 2024, Mr Y died.
9. In July 2024, Miss X asked the Council for all information it held on file about Mr Y such as care records and any assessments it had completed. Between May and July 2024, the Council provided Miss X with the information she had requested.
10. Between July and December 2024, Miss X complained to the Council. She complained about the care provided to Mr Y in 2022 and 2023 and that the Council had not acted to investigate possible fraud when there were unusual transactions in Mr Y’s bank account.
11. We will not investigate this complaint. The matters Miss X complained about happened in 2022 and 2023. This is more than 12 months ago and so the restriction in paragraph three applies. We expect people to complain to us within 12 months of being aware of the matter giving rise to the complaint. If Miss X was concerned about Mr Y’s care, it was open to her to complain sooner. There is no good reason to exercise discretion to consider this late complaint.
12. In any event, we would not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because, as a remedy, Miss X wants the Council to amend the invoice for outstanding care charges and provide her with a financial remedy. We would not be able to achieve this. Our guidance on remedies says that where the person affected has died, we will not normally recommend a symbolic remedy in the same way as we might for someone who is still living. We do not expect an organisation to make a symbolic payment to someone’s estate. We would also not normally recommend payment to an estate where we have to make a judgment about the quality of care provided. This is because these are remedies for injustice to that person and as such cannot have that effect once the person has died.
13. Miss X’s concerns about allegations of fraud would be better investigated by the police. It is open to Miss X to refer the matter to the police.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the issues she complained of are more than 12 months old and there are no good reasons why she did not complain sooner. We also would not be able to achieve what Miss X wants and there is another body better placed to consider part of her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman