Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council placing him in a mental health care home. This is because there are no worthwhile outcomes achievable from an investigation. In addition, some of Mr X’s complaints are late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider the late complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has placed him in a mental health care home which he should not be in. He says he does not have any mental health conditions. Mr X says he struggles with the environment due to the other residents and says the placement is causing harm to his well-being.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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 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

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. Mr X was first placed in a mental health aftercare care home in April 2022. Mr X’s complaint about the Council placing him in this placement is late as it occurred more than 12 months ago. If Mr X was unhappy with the placement, it is reasonable to have expected him to have complained about the matter earlier. As there are no good reasons to exercise discretion, we will not consider this late complaint.
7. We can consider the Council’s actions within the last 12 months. The Council confirmed since Mr X’s placement had given notice, it had reviewed Mr X’s care needs and care plan. The assessment found Mr X did not require a residential care home.
8. The Council has evidenced the action it has taken to find an alternative placement for Mr X. Evidence provided by the Council shows the council approached other care homes and supported living placements. All care providers declined to offer a placement due to not being suitable to meet Mr X’s needs.
9. The Council confirmed sourcing a new placement for Mr X was difficult due to the placement needing to be wheelchair accessible, and due to Mr X’s history of fires in previous properties. The Council also contacted the district council and confirmed Mr X was on the housing register and being supported to make bids. However, none of Mr X’s bids so far were successful.
10. An investigation is not justified as there are no worthwhile outcomes achievable. The Council is aware that Mr X does not require a residential placement and is actively trying to find him an alternative placement. An investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes on this matter.
11. There is also insufficient to suggest the current placement is unsuitable as his needs are being met, indeed the Council instead appears to be overfunding Mr X as it is providing care for needs Mr X does not have. There is also no evidence Mr X is being restricted while in the care home and he can come and go from the home as he wishes. Therefore, again, an investigation would not lead to any worthwhile outcomes.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there are no worthwhile outcomes achievable from an investigation. In addition, some of Mr X’s complaints are late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider the late complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman