Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council arranged or delivered Mr Y’s care and support or dealt with his request to be moved.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained for her son Mr Y that Bristol City Council (the Council)
1. Failed to provide appropriate care and support for Mr Y
2. Failed to properly address his request for a housing transfer
3. Sent financial letters directly to him when there was an agreement to send them to her.
2. She said this caused avoidable distress and a loss of provision for Mr Y and a financial loss as she paid for cleaning.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. Mrs X complained to us about events from 2017. I have investigated complaints about things that happened from June 2020, as events earlier than this are late complaints. There is no reason Mrs X could not have complained to us earlier.
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered Mrs X’s complaint to us, the Council’s responses to her complaint and documents described in the next section of this statement.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

8. The Council has a housing allocations scheme. Applicants for social housing in Bristol are assessed based on housing need and placed in one of four bands (band one being the highest band and band four the lowest). Band two is for applicants who need an urgent move due to harassment, violence or domestic abuse where there is a risk of significant harm which a move would resolve.
9. A council must carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support, applying national criteria to decide if a person is eligible for care. (Care Act 2014, section 9)
10. If a council decides a person needs support, it should prepare a care and support plan which specifies the needs identified in the assessment, says whether they meet any eligibility criteria and sets out how the council is going to meet them. It should give a copy of the care and support plan to the person. (Care Act 2014, sections 24 and 25)
11. Statutory Guidance explains a council should review a care and support plan at least every year, on request or in response to a change in circumstances. The purpose of a review is to see how a care and support plan has been working and to decide if any revisions need to be made to it. The council should act promptly after receiving a request for a review. (Care and Support Statutory Guidance, paragraphs 13.19-21 and 13.32)
12. The Court of Appeal decided:
• A council’s duty under section 9 of the Care Act 2014 is not to achieve the person’s desired outcomes but to assess whether the provision of care and support would contribute to those outcomes
• The wishes of the person may be a primary factor but they are not an overriding consideration.

(R (Davey v Oxfordshire CC)

13. The Mental Capacity Act and Code of Practice to the Act sets out the principles for making decisions for adults who lack mental capacity. An assessment of a person’s mental capacity is required where their capacity is in doubt (Code of Practice paragraph 4.34)

What happened

14. Mr Y has a long-term problem with alcohol use and mental health problems. A social worker carried out a social care assessment in September 2020. The assessment noted:
• Mr Y had mental capacity to make decisions around his care and support
• He was eligible for care and support and was receiving support from a care agency (the first care agency). This included support around managing household tasks
• Mrs X had paid for a deep clean of his flat and was also paying privately for a cleaner
• He was receiving support from a recovery worker and from another support service around reducing alcohol consumption.
15. The social worker drew up a care and support plan which described Mr Y’s needs, the care and support he required and the desired outcomes. The Council commissioned the first care agency to provide care and support. Mr Y also had two other organisations providing him with support around alcohol use and mental health.
16. The case records indicate Mr Y led a chaotic lifestyle, and when unwell during episodes of drinking, he made repeated calls and emails to family members, health services, social care services and to the police. At other times, he did not respond to contacts or answer his door. Sometimes he stayed away from his home for several days.
17. Mrs X provided me with copies of financial letters from the Council which it sent to Mr Y. She said this was fault and that letters should have been sent to her. The Council has on file a letter which Mr Y signed in 2018 saying he gave his consent for Mrs X to deal with correspondence about finances, housing and care needs. However, there are later records from a care agency indicating he did not give permission for staff to discuss matters connected to his care with his family. There are also records from the social worker in 2021 indicating Mr Y had changed his mind about information sharing with his mother.
18. The Council’s housing department awarded Mr Y a Band two priority for rehousing because of harassment (Mr Y had in the past suffered abuse from a person living nearby). The Council told me Mr Y had not bid on a property since 2020.
19. Information from the first care agency indicates Mr Y was not engaging with care and support, was not answering the phone or his door and only accepted support when he needed something like help with benefits. The first care agency said in an email in June 2020 that Mr Y was not keen on having support workers in his flat and preferred to have support in the community. He had been accepting phone support but often declined visits. It was reported that Mrs X had arranged for a clean of Mr Y’s flat.
20. In February 2021, Mr Y contacted the Council and asked for extra support. He said he wanted more support to access the community, manage his money and clean his home. He asked for a review of his care and support plan. A review took place at the start of April. The review noted Mr Y and Mrs X’s views about the care and support provided. The housing officer was also consulted and advised Mr Y to extend his areas of choice and to continue bidding for flats. The first care agency said Mr Y had not been engaging with the service since March and contact from him had been sporadic previously. The outcome of the review was an increase in hours of care and support and to look for a new agency.
21. In June 2021, a social worker visited Mr Y. She noted his flat looked clean and he told her there had been a deep clean the previous week. (Mrs X arranged and paid for this). The social worker spoke to mental health services who had assessed Mr Y and signposted him to alcohol services where he could refer himself for treatment.
22. The Council arranged for a second care agency to provide daily calls to Mr Y from July 2021 and updated his care and support plan to reflect the second agency would be providing more prompting and encouragement around various tasks including housework. The second care agency’s records show Mr Y did not always answer the door and cancelled calls at the weekend. The care workers recorded that they took Mr Y shopping, helped him clean, helped him sort out banking and medication and provided emotional support. Mr Y often sent care workers away early and he did not always want support when they called. He told the social worker at the end of July that he did not want any calls at weekends. Mr Y discussed correspondence he had received from the Council about financial matters. The social worker said she would speak to the finance team and ask for these to be posted to Mrs X instead.
23. The second care agency and social worker completed a review of Mr Y’s care and support in August. Mr Y said support was going well and they discussed the detail of tasks that could be done during the calls.
24. The social worker liaised with Mr Y’s housing officer in August 2021 about bidding for rehousing. The housing officer tried to contact Mr Y by email and visited him. He did not reply.
25. The Council’s responses to Mrs X’s complaint said:
• It had completed social care assessments and provided agency care and support
• Mr Y did not always accept support. He had mental capacity to refuse care and support
• Mr Y wanted to move house. He had the correct priority for rehousing. He needed to place bids
• The Council had funded a one-off deep clean but Mr Y was able to clean up independently and required prompting and encouragement to do so
26. Since complaining to the LGSCO, various actions have taken place on Mr Y’s case including a review of his care and support plan (he was noted to have said he was happy with the second agency) and a professionals’ meeting to discuss how to keep him safe and minimise the risk of self-neglect. The records suggest Mr Y may be drinking very heavily at the moment. The outcome of that meeting included making arrangements to support Mr Y to bid on properties and getting him referred to mental health services through his GP.

Was there fault?

Complaint a: The Council failed to provide appropriate care and support for Mr Y

27. There was no fault by the Council. It acted in line with the duties in the Care Act 2014 and within statutory guidance set out in paragraphs 9 to 11 by assessing Mr Y, drawing up care and support plans to meet his needs and reviewing care and support in line with his request. When requested, the Council increased the support hours to try and meet Mr Y’s needs.
28. There is no dispute the outcomes have not always been successful for Mr Y. But there is no duty on the Council to achieve desired outcomes as confirmed by the Courts. And, as Mr Y has mental capacity to decide about his care – including to refuse care, the Council cannot do anything when he does not engage with care workers.

Complaint b: The Council failed to properly address the request for a housing transfer

29. There was no fault. The Council has awarded Mr Y a priority for rehousing in line with its housing allocations policy. The housing officer has advised Mr Y to widen his areas of choice and to bid. This is appropriate advice.
30. There is no legal requirement for the Council to rehouse Mr Y immediately or at all. He needs to place regular bids and whether he is successful or not depends on if there are other bidders who have greater priority or who have the same priority and have been on the waiting list for longer.

Complaint c: The Council sent financial letters directly to Mr Y when there was an agreement to send them to Mrs X

31. There was an agreement in 2018 to share information, but more recent records indicate Mr Y changed his mind. There was no fault by the Council. Mr Y needs to give written consent for financial letters to be sent to Mrs X. He may change his mind about this depending on how things are between them. Recent records suggest the social worker and Mr Y have had a discussion about information sharing and the social worker, with Mr Y’s consent, was arranging for the finance team to send letters to Mrs X. The social worker acted in line with Mr Y’s wishes. There was no fault.

Back to top

Final decision

32. There was no fault in the way the Council arranged or delivered Mr Y’s care and support or dealt with his request to be moved.
33. I have completed the investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman