Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s safeguarding concerns about his mother. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not properly investigate safeguarding concerns he raised relating to his sibling’s actions towards their mother and financial matters. He said the Council instead made accusations against him and refused to consider his version of events. He said this caused detriment to his relationship with his mother and significant distress for him. He wanted a meeting with the Council for his evidence to be properly considered.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. I have not investigated the complaint as being on behalf of Mr X’s mother. This is because we could not do so without her consent. I have considered the complaint only insofar as it affects Mr X.
7. I have seen evidence of how the Council considered Mr X’s concerns. While we, like the Council, cannot share information with Mr X about the enquiries the Council carried out, I am satisfied it considered his concerns. It consulted relevant people and agencies, and decided action was not required to safeguard Mr X’s mother. It considered Mr X’s concerns about his mother’s ability to manage her own finances, but considered that she had mental capacity.
8. Mr X may disagree with the Council’s decision not to take any further action, but there is insufficient evidence the Council acted with fault and so we will not investigate the matter. The Council signposted Mr X to the Court of Protection as the appropriate body to decide on disputes about a person’s capacity and best interests.
9. Mr X’s complaint to us in in part about the Council making accusations about him. There is no evidence of any formal enquiries by the Council in this respect, and this has not therefore resulted in any findings or caused injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman