Summary: We will not investigate Ms X and Ms Y’s complaint about their mother, Ms Z. Due the length of time which has passed, we are unlikely to be able to reach reliable conclusions or achieve meaningful outcomes for Ms X, Ms Y and Ms Z.

The complaint

1. Ms X and Ms Y complain on behalf of Ms Z about London Borough of Brent (the Council) and Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). They say the Council and Trust:
• Disregarded their concerns about discharging Ms Z from hospital in February 2024. Ms Z later fell at home and needed to be readmitted to another hospital.
• Undermined Ms X’s and Ms Y’s Lasting Power of Attorney and did not involve them in decisions about Ms Z’s care.
• Did not keep them updated about Ms Z’s progress and wrongly appointed their sister as next of kin.
2. Ms X and Ms Y say events have caused Ms Z and themselves distress, time and trouble, impacted their sleep and divided the family. They would like the Council and Trust to apologise and make a financial remedy to them.

Back to top

The Ombudsmen’s role and powers

3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants (Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 3(2) and Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and Ms Y as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Ms X and Ms Y had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

6. In September 2023, the Trust admitted Ms Z. During her admission her mental capacity fluctuated, and then in December she suffered two strokes.
7. In January 2024, the Trust started to plan Ms Z’s discharge from hospital. The Council was responsible for arranging a care package for Ms Z to return home. Ms X and Ms Z were not happy with the plan to send Ms Z back home and felt she needed 24/7 care in a nursing home. They requested a meeting with the Council and Trust.
8. In early February 2024, Ms X complained to the Council and Trust.
9. In mid-February 2024, the Trust held a discharge meeting with Ms Z, her family (including Ms X and Ms Y), and the Council. Ms X and Ms Y repeated their concerns about the discharge plan. But the Trust decided Ms Z had regained capacity, then discharged her back home with a care package two days after the meeting.
10. The Council considered Ms X’s complaint between February and July 2024.
11. After Ms X’s complaint in February 2024, because Ms Z had capacity, the Trust requested Ms Z’s written consent for Ms X and Ms Y to complain on her behalf. Because the family did not obtain that written consent, the Trust refused to consider the complaint.
12. In September 2024, Ms X called the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). She wished to complain about Ms Z’s discharge in February 2024. PHSO advised Ms X she needed to submit a written complaint, including a final response from the Trust. PHSO also advised Ms X to raise any complaint about the Council to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO).
13. In February 2025, Ms X resent her complaint to the Trust.
14. In June 2025, Ms X complained about the Council to the LGSCO. She told me Ms Z did not have capacity to bring the complaint herself.

My view

15. Ms X, Ms Y and Ms Z were aware of the issues involved in the complaint in February 2024.
16. I asked Ms X and Ms Y why they delayed submitting the complaint about the Council. They said they were under a lot of pressure to respond to an investigation into them, by the Office of the Public Guardian. I understand that would have been time consuming, but also that investigation concluded around October 2024. They also said they sought support from an advocacy organisation to ensure their complaint to LGSCO was ready. While that was good practice, I am not persuaded it is good reason to justify such a significant delay.
17. Ms X also says she complained to PHSO about the Trust within 12 months, in September 2024. However, I am not persuaded Ms X submitted a proper written complaint form to PHSO as it requires.
18. When someone complains on behalf of a person who lacks capacity, we may decide not to investigate because we are unlikely to be able to reach reliable conclusions or achieve meaningful outcomes. 
19. The more time passes between the events and a complaint, the more unlikely it is we can investigate them effectively, gather reliable evidence and reach a sound decision.
20. I consider we should not investigate Ms X’s and Ms Y’s complaints about the Council and Trust as we would not be able to achieve a meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Decision

21. I will not investigate Ms X and Ms Y’s complaints about the Council and Trust.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman