The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint until an investigation by the Office of the Public Guardian had concluded. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall call Ms X, complained about the Council’s decision not to progress her complaint until the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) had completed its investigation into concerns around the issuing of her power of attorney for her mother.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X has power of attorney for health and welfare matters for her mother, Mrs Y.
The Council raised a concern to the OPG about whether Mrs Y had capacity when the power of attorney was granted. The OPG started an investigation.
The Council told Ms X it would not provide documents relating to Ms X whilst the investigation was ongoing. It also cancelled a pre-planned meeting.
Ms X complained to the Council. The Council told Ms X it could not progress her complaint until the OPG’s investigation was complete and it had reached a decision on whether the power of attorney should have been granted.
Ms X complained to this office. We told Ms X we needed to place her complaint on hold until we knew the outcome of the OPG investigation. This was because we could not reach a view on whether Ms X was a suitable representative for Mrs Y until OPG had decided the matter.
Ms X recently informed us the OPG investigation had concluded. It had no concerns with the issuing of the power of attorney and it remains in place. We were satisfied Ms X was a suitable representative and we reopened this complaint to assess whether it is a matter we can and should investigate.
I note Ms X is unhappy with the Council’s decision not to consider her complaint until the OPG had completed its investigation. However I can see no sign of fault in the Council’s approach here. We also decided to place the complaint on hold for the same reason.
As the OPG investigation is now closed, Ms X can now ask the Council to progress her substantive complaint and consider it via its full complaints procedure.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision to place her complaint on hold until the outcome of the OPG investigation was known and Ms X can now ask the Council to consider her complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman