Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that her father does not need to be placed in an extra care property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s decision that her father does not need to be placed in an extra care property. She says her father is currently living in an extra care property.

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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (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. In 2016, Ms X’s father, Mr A, was discharged with a package of care into an extra care property in another council’s (Council 1) area. This means Mr A is ordinarily resident in Council 1’s area and so Council 1 would be responsible for meeting any of Mr A’s eligible care needs. Mr A’s package of care stopped once his independence returned, but he remained living in the extra care property.
6. Council 1 completed a care needs assessment. In this assessment, Council 1 noted Mr X did not have any eligible care needs that needed to be met by the Council. The assessment did note Mr A was recommended for accommodation in a care setting closer to his family and to allow close monitoring by staff.
7. Mr X wants to move to the Council’s area. The Council completed a care needs assessment which found Mr X did not have any eligible needs. Therefore, Mr A has been assessed by both councils not needing extra care housing. The Council provided advice to Mr A and his family that they should bid for housing.
8. An investigation is not justified as we are unlikely to find fault. The Council has appropriately completed a care needs assessment and confirmed Mr A does not have any eligible care needs.
9. Further, even if Mr A had been assessed as having eligible care needs, Mr A is resident of Council 1’s area. Therefore, Council 1 would be the responsible council for meeting any eligible care needs. If Ms X disagrees with Council 1’s care needs assessment, she would need to make a complaint to Council 1.
10. There appears to be some contradictory elements within Council 1’s care assessment. This is because the Council has not identified any eligible needs, yet the assessment appeared to recommend Mr A for accommodation in a care setting. It is not clear why this recommendation was made if Mr A does not have any eligible care needs. However, this isn’t a matter for the Council as they did not complete this care assessment. If Ms X wishes to pursue this matter further, she needs to complain to Council 1.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman