Summary: The Council responded appropriately to Mrs X’s requests for assistance for her daughter Ms X. It is up to Mrs X to allow the Council to complete its assessments before it can provide any other necessary services.

The complaint

1. Mrs X (as I shall call her) complains that the Council has failed to complete an assessment of her daughter’s needs; has unreasonably refused Direct Payments for respite and has refused the requested Disabled Facilities Grant to make the house more suitable for Ms X’s needs

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’.
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

4. I considered the information provided by Mrs X and by the Council. (We have previously considered a related complaint made by Mrs X in 2018, in which we found no evidence of fault by the Council.) Both parties had the opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement and I considered their comments before I reached a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

5. Disabled Facilities Grants are provided under the terms of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Councils have a statutory duty to give grant aid to disabled people for certain adaptations. Before approving a grant, a council must be satisfied the work is necessary, meets the disabled person’s needs, and is reasonable and practicable.
6. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require councils to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to everyone regardless of their finances or whether the council thinks the person has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
7. An adult with possible care and support needs or a carer may choose to refuse an assessment. In these circumstances councils do not have to carry out an assessment
8. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for one to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They enable people to arrange their own care and support to meet those needs. After considering the suitability of the person requesting direct payments against the conditions in the Care Act 2014, the council must decide whether to provide a direct payment. In all cases, the council should consider the request as quickly as possible. Where refused, the council should explain its decision in writing to the person who made the request.

What happened – assessment of need

9. Ms X is a disabled adult with several physical conditions which Mrs X says impact on her mobility and her ability to carry out activities of daily living for herself. She has selective mutism but can communicate with the use of an iPad. Mrs X provides her care.
10. The Council has previously been unable to ascertain the effect of Ms X’s reported medial conditions on her ability to carry out daily tasks. The Council says it has continued to try and obtain this information but despite repeated attempts has been unable so far to complete a social care needs assessment for Ms X. In 2020 (during the pandemic) the Council undertook an assessment with Mrs X over Teams. It noted it would want to complete a face-toface assessment with Ms X when it could do so safely. The Council says it has been unable to validate the information given by Mrs X since then. (Mrs X said it would be too difficult for Ms X to join in despite the communication aid on her iPad). The initial assessment was that Ms X had eligible needs and a likely personal budget of £470 a week but that has not been able to be progressed.
11. The Council offered Mrs X a period of assistance from the Council’s reablement team who would be able to provide information about Ms X’s needs and abilities to enable completion of the assessment. The Council says that although Mrs X initially agreed to this, she subsequently asked the team to leave so no assessment could be completed.
12. The Council has offered Mrs X a period of respite for Ms X with its in-house learning disability team which would both give Mrs X a break from her caring role and enable Ms X to be assessed. Mrs X has refused that offer.
13. Mrs X has, the Council says, also refused its offer of some day care services to enable an assessment to be completed.
14. As Mrs X has repeatedly said that the learning disability team should be involved with her daughter’s care, the Council has offered an assessment by that team. The Council says Mrs X set out a list of expectations (which it has provided evidence for) before she would agree to Ms X receiving a service from that team so it has so far been unable to begin. The Council has written to Mrs X to explain the team did not have the capacity to meet her requirements about choice of care works but it would continue to check its capacity.

Respite arrangements

15. In 2020 Mrs X asked for the Council to provide a one-off payment for her to take a holiday with Ms X, rather than the respite service offered by the Council. The Council replied, “We are able to organise respite care for (Ms X) to ensure that you have a break from your caring role, in one of our in-house residential services, where she will be cared for by a team of trained staff.” It said it would not agree a one-off payment to enable them to take a holiday together while it was still awaiting evidence of Ms X’s needs. In response to a complaint from Mrs X that the Council was refusing respite, it wrote, “I would like to assure you that Adult Social Care are not refusing to provide respite for you and (Ms X) and are able to offer respite in one of Surrey County Council’s respite facilities.

The Disabled Facilities Grant

16. Mrs X also complains the Council has failed to provide proper facilities by way of a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) for her daughter.
17. The Council provided a DFG to fund some adapted bathroom works for Ms X. Mrs X complained the works were unsuitable, so the Council agreed to a further Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment to consider their suitability.
18. At the OT visit in 2021, the OTs noted the bedroom with the adapted en-suite bathroom was being used by Mrs X. When asked about the reasons why (Ms X) did not use this bedroom, Mrs X said Ms X “finds that the ceiling is too low so the noise of the rain falling on it and the birds outside the window keep her awake at night.”
19. Mrs X was requesting that the kitchen, living room, bathroom and bedroom doors were widened. The OTs did not report a need for this. They said the main living room door and bedroom door had already been widened. Ms X was not using the adapted bathroom. Mrs X had said Ms X could not use the kitchen so there was no need to widen the door.
20. Mrs X was requesting a larger driveway. The Council had previously funded the creation of a larger driveway and the OTs judged there was sufficient space for Ms X to transfer easily.
21. Mrs X requested the installation of an intercom system. The OTs could not find a need for an intercom system. They said as Ms X could not be left alone in the property, she would not need to use a front door intercom.
22. Mrs X requested the creation of a wetroom for Ms X. The OTs noted an adapted bathroom had already been funded for Ms X. The OTs recommended Ms X moved into the bedroom which had been adapted for her use. Mrs X then said Ms X could not use her wheelchair in that room,
23. The OT report says Mrs X became agitated during the assessment and asked the OTs to leave, therefore they could not complete a full assessment. Mrs X says she has never asked the OTs to leave: however, their report says “During the assessment (Mrs X) become very agitated with OT's recommendations and ask OT's to leave therefore OT's were unable to fully complete OT assessment and gather all necessary information to make appropriate recommendations for (Ms X)”.

The complaint

24. In 2020 and 2021 Mrs X complained to the Council about its failure to assist Ms X or to assist her in her caring role. She complained about a lack of contact.
25. The Council wrote to Mrs X in October 2020 and listed the number of contacts different officers had made. It said it had offered support with respite care and home care and signposted her to other services such as meals on wheels and the food bank. It specified the evidence it needed from her to complete an assessment. It repeated the offer of support from the reablement team.
26. Mrs X complained again in January 2021 about the Council’s failure to offer services. The Council reiterated the services it had offered and said it was not refusing to offer support but needed the evidence of a completed assessment of Ms X’s needs to consider her eligibility and offer appropriate services.

Analysis

27. The Council has been unable to complete an assessment of Ms X’s needs sufficient to decide her eligibility and the services it can provide for her. Mrs X has not yet provided the evidence the Council needs to do so nor allowed any of the suggested options for completing the assessment. It is not fault on the part of the Council that has not been completed.
28. Mrs X has previously had works completed under a DFG for Ms X’s benefit but currently is using those facilities herself. She was unwilling for the OTs who visited to ascertain if there were additional needs to complete their full assessment.
29. The Council has not refused respite and has offered different solutions but so far Mrs X has not agreed these.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have now completed this investigation on the basis there is no fault in the actions of the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman