Somerset County Council (19 001 363)

Category : Adult care services > Assessment and care plan

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 23 Aug 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complains the Council acted with fault in withdrawing the social care hours he received each week while in dispute with his family, causing him to have to fund his own care, which he cannot afford to do. The Council acted properly in carrying out an assessment of Mr X’s care needs, so the Ombudsman cannot substitute another view. It was entitled to withdraw care.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, is represented by his mother, Mrs X. She complains on his behalf that the Council:
  • Withdrew long standing support too quickly while in dispute with Mr X and his family carer;
  • Assumed Mr X's family carers and friends would pick up his eligible support needs without establishing their willingness and ability to do so via a carer’s assessment; and
  • Wrongly emphasised the sustainability of the support provider in relation to Mr X's needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
  2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
  3. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I read the complaint correspondence and considered the Council’s duties under the Care Act 2014 and its guidance. I shared a draft of this decision with both parties and invited their comments. I received none.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mrs X says Mr X had received funded care from the Council for 29 years until the Council’s decision to withdraw it. He received a daily half hour visit, extended to one hour on Fridays, and saw a counsellor once a fortnight. The principal reason for the care visits was Mr X’s assessed eligible need for help developing personal relationships and using community services.

The manner of the withdrawal

  1. The Council assessed Mr X’s care needs in January 2019. It found he no longer had the same needs and decided to end the care package, reducing the visits over a period of weeks. Mrs X says Mr X’s needs have not changed. She also says the Council should not have withdrawn the care so quickly, while she was in dispute with the Council and before she received a copy of the assessment.
  2. The issue here is if there was procedural fault in the manner of the assessment or the Council’s actions afterwards. I can only comment on the judgement the assessment contains if it was conducted with fault.
  3. The evidence I have seen shows the Council visited Mr X. The assessment dealt with different categories of potential care need. The document shows the Council found his condition did not create eligible care needs. The assessor told him and Mrs X about the decision on the day of the assessment. While this caused Mr X distress, I do not find fault with the conduct of the assessment. I cannot therefore question the assessor’s judgement.
  4. The Council said it would withdraw the care visits gradually. While Mrs X says it did so too quickly, that is a matter of opinion rather than fault. I also find no reason in the Care Act guidance that prevents a council withdrawing care while a person disputes the withdrawal or while awaiting paperwork. The requirement is to review a person’s eligible care needs before withdrawing care. The Council did that in its assessment in January 2019. I do not find it at fault.

Assuming family and friends would pick up eligible support needs

  1. As the Council found Mr X had no eligible care needs, it did not assume family and friends would pick any up. I do not find it at fault.

Sustainability of the support provider

  1. I have seen no evidence the Council took the decision to withdraw Mr X’s care because of any minimum number of hours any agency wanted the Council to accept. The reason for the withdrawal was because the Council decided Mr X no longer had eligible care needs.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have completed my investigation, not upholding the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings