Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how to meet adult social care needs when the current provision ends. The court of protection is better placed to settle a dispute about how best to meet a person’s needs when they do not have capacity to decide. The claimed injustice is future and speculative and so there is no worthwhile outcome to achieve from an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms D says the Council is failing to put relevant provision in place to meet her relative, Mr E’s, needs when his current provision ends in December 2024. Ms D says this will impact on Mr E’s wellbeing and he will become deskilled and withdrawn. Ms D has suggested what she thinks is suitable provision and what the Council should provide to meet Mr E’s needs.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr E is an adult with eligible care and support needs, which the Council must meet. Mr E does not have capacity to decide on his care support, and therefore the Council must act in his best interests in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
6. Mr E’s care package will end in December 2024. The Council has been following the correct process to assess Mr E’s care and support needs. The Council has completed best interest decisions, including Ms D, to decide how best to meet Mr E’s needs. This process is ongoing, and the Council is continuing to update Ms D.
7. The Ombudsman cannot decide on future injustice and cannot settle a dispute about how best to meet Mr E’s needs. Ms D wishes to challenge the outcome of decisions made in Mr E’s best interests and wishes to challenge how best to meet Mr E’s care and support needs. The court of protection is better placed to consider and decide such issues.
8. The Council accepts some failures in communication with Ms D. I do not consider the impact is enough to justify investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms D’s complaint because the issues are ongoing, and we cannot decide on potential future injustice. I do not consider there is a worthwhile outcome to justify an Ombudsman investigation. The court of protection is better placed to decide the issues complained about; to settle a dispute about how best to meet Mr E’s care and support needs.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman