Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council communicated with a family member regarding Mr B’s status as his mother’s lasting power of attorney. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating this complaint and his complaint about the way the Council considered his mother’s care needs.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains the Council sent an email to his sister which expressed opinions about him based on inaccurate information. Mr B says this led to misappropriation of his mother funds to try and remove him as her Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA). Mr B says the Council has ignored his request to release information it holds about him. He feels the Council has not taken concerns he raised about his mother’s safety seriously. As an outcome Mr B wants the Council to release all the information it holds about him and review its procedures relating to LPA advice. He also wants the Council to review the concerns he has raised about his mother’s ability to walk outside near her home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant including the Council’s response to his complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr B is lasting power attorney for his mother alongside another family member. He complained to the Council in August 2025 about an email its officer had sent to a family member. Mr B said the family member had made several attempts to have his LPA revoked over the years. He explained to the Council why he had asked his mother to sign a copy of the pages of the LPA document.
6. Mr B said he was unhappy the Council had not questioned the family member about their actions. He said the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) was reviewing the family member’s conduct as LPA and he did not believe they were acting in his mother’s best interests. Mr B also complained about the way the Council had assessed his mother’s needs in particular her safety when walking outside near her home.
7. The Council responded to the complaint and said its officer was entitled to give a professional opinion undertaking a mental capacity assessment when a person had a diagnosis or signs of dementia which could impair their capacity (to make decisions). It did not agree its officer had attempted to undermine Mr B’s status as his mother’s attorney.
8. The Council confirmed it had assessed Mr B’s mother’s care needs in January 2025. It said the assessment had noted his mother had experienced a fall before the Council started its assessment but did not go into details about outside safety.
9. The Council said its occupational therapy team would not assess safety and mobility further than the boundary of the property. It also said Mr B’s mother had not shared concerns about walking outside. It told Mr B he could contact the relevant team about the state of the roads and pathways in the area. The Council also told Mr B he could contact the OPG if he had concerns about any other LPA his mother had.
10. We will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. The evidence suggests the Council communicated with a family member about their concerns about Mr B as his mother’s LPA. There is not enough evidence of fault in what the Council said, and Mr B can contact the OPG about his concerns. Mr B says he asked the Council to release information it holds about him. If Mr B is unhappy with the Council’s response he should complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
11. The Council explained how it assessed Mr B’s mother’s safety outside the home and what it was appropriate to consider. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman