Summary: We have upheld Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to charge her late mother for care. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s decision to charge her late mother for care. She says it failed to apply its own criteria when considering whether to a apply a discretionary property disregard. Ms X also complains about the Council’s complaint handling.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy.(Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code. I have also considered the Council’s guidance on property disregard panels. The Council’s guidance says there is a two-stage process where an application is considered by a principal social worker and then a panel. It states that specific criteria should be considered and rationale for the decision explained.

Back to top

My assessment

6. If we investigated this complaint, it is likely that we would find the Council at fault. Under section 7 of the Property Disregards practice guidance, it states the panel will refer to specific criteria when exercising its discretion. However, the documents do not demonstrate a decision was made with reference to this criteria and they do not show the rationale was properly explained to Ms X.
7. We therefore invited the Council to consider remedying this injustice caused to Ms X by taking the following actions within one month of this decision:

• Provide Ms X with an apology

• To reconsider Ms X’s application in line with the guidance

• To inform Ms X of the outcome and a further right of appeal, if the decision remains the same.

8. To its credit, the Council agreed to resolve the complaint and will complete the above within one month of our final decision.
9. I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that she incurred additional legal fees because the Council did not respond to her complaint appropriately. It is the Ombudsman’s view that a complainant should not usually need a solicitor or other professional adviser to help them make a complaint to the Council or the Ombudsman. I see no reason why Ms X could not have raised her complaint to the Council and the Ombudsman herself. It is therefore unlikely that an investigation would recommend that a financial award would be appropriate in these circumstances.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We have upheld this complaint. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman