Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council did not properly assess her father, Mr C’s, social care needs, and did not record his condition accurately. This is because Mrs B’s complaint is late and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to the desired outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complains that in 2013 and 2014, the Council did not properly assess her father, Mr C’s social care needs. Mrs B says the Council cut and pasted old information into a new document, meaning the assessment did not reflect Mr C’s deterioration. Mrs B says that this information was used in deciding Mr C was not eligible for NHS continuing health care funding (CHC). Mrs B considers that had the social care assessment been accurate, it is likely Mr C would have received CHC because of his significant needs. Mrs B said that this also had an impact on her own finances and caused her a great deal of stress.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I read the information Mrs B provided to us and discussed her complaint with her. I also considered information provided by the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. Mrs B’s had an opportunity to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered her comments before issuing this final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In 2010, Mr C had a stroke which Mrs B said left him disabled on his left hand side. Mr C had further transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs, also called “mini strokes”) which caused his condition to worsen. He had a package of care in place at home. Mrs B told us that Mr C had significant healthcare needs, and needed two carers at a time. She said she raised concerns with her father’s social workers about whether the care he received met his needs, and that she felt he should be assessed for CHC (a package of care arranged and funded by the NHS). Mrs B said her concerns about Mr C’s deterioration were not recorded in the social care assessments. Mrs B said the Council told her someone would look into this for her, but she did not receive a response.
8. Mr C died in 2015. Mrs B then experienced a period of ill health before she was able to raise her concerns with the NHS Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) in 2016. Mrs B followed the steps for appealing a CHC decision. This led to an NHS independent panel review in 2019, which found Mr C not eligible for CHC funding. Mrs B then complained to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO).
9. Mrs B explained she was dissatisfied with the Council’s involvement in Mr C’s care prior to 2014, and said she had raised these concerns with social workers and in writing on three occasions. Mrs B told us she wrote to the Council in 2014, 2015 and 2018 with her concerns but did not receive a response. Mrs B said she was not aware she could escalate her complaint to LGSCO as she did not know of LGSCO’s existence. Mrs B explained that throughout the process, she had been repeatedly directed to PHSO as the next step in pursuing her complaint. The Council told us it has not dealt with the matter previously.
10. The information available indicates that Mrs B followed the steps she was advised to by the organisations, that is, complaining to PHSO, which makes final decisions on complaints about the NHS. I acknowledge Mrs B’s explanation that she would have escalated her Council complaint to LGSCO earlier, had she known about LGSCO. However, the social work assessments which are the subject of Mrs B’s Council complaint are now approximately seven years old. Mrs B has been aware of the problems she complains about for more than 12 months before complaining to LGSCO. This means her complaint is ‘late’.
11. The Council said it has not dealt with a complaint from Mrs B about these matters, and that relevant evidence may have been destroyed owing to the amount of time that has passed. Because so much time has elapsed since the events complained of took place, is it is unlikely that if we investigated the complaint about the Council, we would be able to achieve the remedy that Mrs B seeks (a refund of the money paid towards Mr C’s care). I therefore consider there are no good reasons to investigate the complaint against the Council now.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council. This is because the complaint about the Council is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate it now.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman