Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled Ms X’s complaints about a neighbour. This is because part of the complaint is late and because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council ignoring her concerns about a person in need of care and support resulting in their death. Ms X says she has suffered ill health arising from the issues she is raising and would like Council staff to be held accountable.

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 complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, 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 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:

• 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

6. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X complained of nuisance by a vulnerable neighbour that she said was a health and safety risk to her and her property. She said the neighbour needed support which the Council was not providing.
9. Ms X’s neighbour was a social housing tenant of a different Council. The Housing Ombudsman found failings in the way the other Council as a landlord failed to address Ms X’s complaints.
10. Ms X also complained to Kent County Council’s (KCC) social care department about her neighbour needing care and support.
11. In December 2023 KCC responded to Ms X to say the neighbour was being supported by it but it could not provide any more information to her data protection reasons. Its letter also said :

• a social worker telephoned Ms X and spoke to her;
• a social worker visited the neighbour complained about;
• Ms X could call the relevant team manager if she had any further concerns;
• she could complain to us and it provided our details.

12. The Council highlighted, that while it had county wide responsibility for adult social care, it was the neighbouring Council who was responsible for dealing with complaints about neighbours.
13. We will not investigate. This is because Ms X’s complaints to KCC took place more than 12 months ago. It would have been reasonable for Ms X to bring this complaint within 12 months of becoming aware of the matters now being raised to us. I see no good reasons for her not complaining at the time.
14. We also will not investigate as I do not see a worthwhile outcome achievable. Coroners are responsible for investigating, the reasons or the manner of someone’s death, not the Ombudsman.
15. Ms X has achieved a remedy from the Housing Ombudsman for the landlord failings. We have no remit to investigate complaints about social housing matters.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is late, and I see no worthwhile outcome achievable.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman