Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council handled her safeguarding concerns about her sister, Ms Y. Miss X also complained about delays in setting up the financial account. Miss X said this distressed her and financially impacted Ms Y’s estate. There was fault in the way the Council delayed sending invoices for Ms Y’s care. This frustrated Miss X. The Council has already remedied this fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council handled her safeguarding concerns about her sister, Ms Y. Miss X also complained about delays in setting up the financial account. Miss X said this distressed her and financially impacted Ms Y’s estate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
4. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Miss X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
6. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

8. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect. An enquiry could range from a conversation with the person who is the subject of the concern, to a more formal multi-agency arrangement. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse. (section 42, Care Act 2014)
9. A council has a duty to arrange care and support for those with eligible needs, and a power to meet both eligible and non-eligible needs in places other than care homes. A council can choose to charge for non-residential care following a person’s needs assessment. Where it decides to charge, the council must follow the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and have regard to the Care Act statutory guidance. (Care Act 2014, section 14 and 17)
10. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 is the framework for acting and deciding for people who lack the mental capacity to make particular decisions for themselves. The Act (and the Code of Practice 2007) describes the steps a person should take when dealing with someone who may lack capacity to make decisions for themselves. It describes when to assess a person’s capacity to make a decision, how to do this, and how to make a decision on behalf of somebody who cannot do so.
11. The Court of Protection deals with decision-making for adults who may lack capacity to make specific decisions for themselves.
12. The Court of Protection may need to become involved in difficult cases or cases where there is disagreement which cannot be resolved in any other way. The Court of Protection:

• decides whether a person has capacity to make a particular decision for themselves;
• makes declarations, decisions or orders on financial or welfare matters affecting people who lack capacity to make such decisions;
• appoints deputies to make decisions for people lacking capacity to make those decisions;
• decides whether a Lasting Power of Attorney or Enduring Power of Attorney is valid; and
• removes deputies or attorneys who fail to carry out their duties.

13. If there is a need for continuing decision-making powers and there is no relevant EPA or LPA, the Court of Protection may appoint a deputy to make decisions for a person. It will also say what decisions the deputy has the authority to make on the person’s behalf. The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) oversees the work of attorneys and court-appointed deputies and produces detailed guidance for them.

What happened

14. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
15. Ms Y had additional needs. Miss X had deputyship for finances, health and welfare. After being discharged from hospital, she spent time in a residential care home before being discharged home in June 2024. Miss X confirmed Ms Y had over the £23,250 threshold. The Council confirmed Ms Y would pay for her care. The Council arranged a care package for when Ms Y returned home. It told Miss X of the cost, and the weekly charge for arranging the care.
16. Miss X chased the Council for invoices for Ms Y’s care in August 2024. The Council told Miss X it would start invoicing when the care package was set up on its system.
17. The Council started issuing invoices in October 2024. Miss X challenged the invoices and asked for a breakdown of the costs. The Council agreed to place the invoices on hold while it provided confirmation. The Council asked the care provider to add detail to the invoices. The Council continued to invoice Miss X.
18. Miss X raised concerns about her brother, Mr Z, in January 2025. Miss X said Mr Z had moved into Ms Y’s home after being evicted. Miss X raised concerns Mr Z was abusive. The Council considered the concerns and asked the care provider for information on Mr Z. The provider reported Mr Z engaged appropriately. The provider confirmed it had not witnessed any potential abuse. The Council noted a complex family dynamic and decided it would not take further action as there was no evidence of harm or other concerns.
19. Miss X continued to raise concerns about Mr Z and the invoices.
20. In April 2025, carers reported Ms Y was refusing medication.
21. Ms Y was admitted to hospital in May 2025.
22. The Council continued to engage with Ms Y and the family while she was in hospital. The Council held a meeting about the situation while Ms Y was in hospital. The Council repeated there was no evidence of abuse or neglect from Mr Z, and the Council decided it would not take any further action.
23. Ms Y died in July 2025.
24. Miss X complained in August 2025. She complained the meeting in July 2025 was to discuss Ms Y’s care and support, but it was about Mr Z.
25. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint in September 2025. The response said the meeting was to explore concerns from Miss X about Mr Z. The Council said it considered the risks and decided it would not take further action. The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint.
26. In October 2025, Miss X asked the Council to explain why visit times in invoices were later than they should have been.
27. In November 2025, the Council explained the call times were late because of an error by the provider, but the visits were completed at the correct time. Miss X said she was unhappy with the reasons given, and the delayed responses from the Council.
28. Miss X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Miss X would like the Council to waive its administration fees and provide compensation for the distress.
29. Miss X complained to the Council again in January 2026. She complained about the invoices and lack of response to the concerns she raised.
30. The Council issued its complaint response two days later. The response said some of the visits were logged late but confirmed the visits happened at the correct times. The Council did not uphold the complaint. The Council upheld the complaint about the delays in responding to Miss X’s original queries from 2024.
31. Miss X complained a week later. She complained the Council delayed setting up the package of care and invoicing her. Miss X asked the Council to waive its administration fee.
32. The Council responded in February 2026. The Council accepted the delays in starting invoicing Miss X and apologised. The Council agreed to credit one month of its administration fees.
33. In response to my enquiries the Council stated it considered all reports regarding Mr Z, consulted professionals, but there was no evidence of harm so decided it would not take action.

My findings

Safeguarding

34. It is clear circumstances are complicated by disagreements within the family. I appreciate this is a difficult situation.
35. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body, and it is not our role to decide whether neglect or abuse has taken place, this is the Council’s responsibility. We do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it is right or wrong. We investigate the processes a council followed in making its safeguarding enquiries, to assess if it made decisions properly. Our role is to consider if the Council followed the Care and Support Statutory Guidance process and considered all the relevant information to reach its view.
36. Miss X raised concerns about Mr Z throughout his time living with Ms Y. The Council considered Miss X’s concerns, and the contacts from professionals, and engaged with professionals, including the care agency who saw Ms Y daily. The Council, after considering all the evidence following each referral, decided it would not take safeguarding action. It confirmed this is because there was no evidence Mr Z posed any risk of harm or safeguarding concern to Ms Y. The Council considered the information, followed the correct process and made a merits-based decision, as it is entitled to do. The Council was not at fault.

Invoices

37. Miss X complained about the times on the invoices saying some calls were late at night. The Council has explained these were manually added due to different carers retrospectively logging calls, but the calls happened at the correct time. There is no suggestion or evidence the care was not delivered. The Council has explained the reason for the different times and Ms Y received the required care. The Council was not at fault.
38. The Council accepted it delayed setting up the account and sending the invoices for Ms Y’s care. This frustrated Miss X. This is fault. The Council has apologised and credited one month’s administrative costs to Miss X’s account. This is a suitable remedy to acknowledge the injustice the Council fault caused.

Back to top

Decision

39. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which the Council has already remedied.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman