Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s responses to Mr X’s concerns about his sibling’s role as an attorney for his parent. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We are unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Council’s recent actions and we will not investigate historic matters as these are caught by the time bar on the Ombudsman’s powers.

The complaint

1. In short, Mr X says the Council has ignored his concerns about his sibling’s role as an attorney for his parent over the past eight years.
2. Mr X says he has suffered abuse from the sibling and that his parent has given money to the sibling. Mr X is also concerned his parent is being subjected to ‘solitary confinement’ in a care home.
3. Mr X would like us to investigate and also wants a public enquiry.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
5. 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)
6. 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 and/or there is a more suitably body to deal with the complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X which includes the Council’s response to his complaint.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

9. With respect to matters within the last 12 months, the Council’s response says:

• it is legally restricted from sharing information with Mr X about his parent as he does not hold a Lasting Power of Attorney/.
• it is not aware of his parent being held in ‘solitary confinement’. And Mr X’s parent can decide on the day with care home staff to stay in their bedroom or stay in the social spaces in the care home. Mr X can raise concerns with the care home and then the Council’s safeguarding team if he remains concerned.
• the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) investigates concerns about attorneys.

10. We will not investigate recent matters as we are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s response. It explains there is an attorney in place, legally authorised to represent his parent, which does not invalidate Mr X’s right to raise safeguarding concerns about his parent with the care home and the Council’s safeguarding unit. And Mr X can raise his concerns to the OPG which is the official body set up by parliament to consider complaints about attorneys.
11. We will not investigate historic issues going back over eight years as these are caught by the time bar on the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. I see no good reasons to go back in time in view of Mr X’s recourse to the OPG and also because a third party holds a Lasting Power of Attorney concerning his parent’s affairs.
12. Further, Mr X’s complaints about abusive behaviour from the sibling should be reported to the Police. This lies outside the Council’s remit. And finally, we have no powers to start a public enquiry.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s response. And there are no good reasons to investigate historic matters as these are caught by a time bar on the Ombudsman’s remit.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman