Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council assessed
Mrs Y’s care needs and no fault in the subsequent decisions made about the care she needed. There is no evidence to show that Mrs Y or her family were pressured into accepting care or that they raised any objections at the time.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains of behalf of her mother, Mrs Y. She complains about the way Mrs Y’s care needs were assessed and about the subsequent level of care provided.
2. Mrs X had support from an advocate to bring this complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. We:

• considered the written complaint presented by Mrs X’s advocate;
• considered the correspondence exchanged between the advocate and the Council including the Council’s response to the complaint;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the responses;
• considered relevant legislation.

6. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on our draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation

7. The Care Act 2014 and the Care and Support Statutory Guidance set out how councils must assess and meet identified needs for care and support.
8. Councils must carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. If a council decides a person has eligible needs, it must set out how it will meet those needs in a care and support plan.
9. The Care Act 2014 gives local authorities a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). The care and support plan should consider what the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area. When preparing a care and support plan the local authority must involve any carer the adult has.

Background

10. Mr Y is in her nineties. After falling down the stairs at home she was admitted to hospital. Before her discharge from hospital the Council assessed her care needs.
11. Mrs Y’s needs assessment shows she consented to the assessment and agreed to a period of short-term domiciliary care on her return home. She did not think she needed long- term care.
12. Mrs X says the assessment was based solely on Mrs Y’s presentation in hospital and the assessor failed to consider Mrs Y’s ability to manage in her own home.
13. Mrs X and other family members believe the level of home care provided to Mrs Y was unnecessary. She says the family had little choice but to agree to four daily care visits, because a social worker informed them that Mrs Y would not be able to return home without this level of care.
14. Emails between a social worker and Mrs X show she was made aware of the proposed visits and the timings of visits. The social worker explained that Mrs Y may be discharged to a residential care home prior to going home due to hospital pressures, and that any such stay would be free of charge. The social worker also explained, that when Mrs Y returned home a financial assessment would be completed to determine if/how much she (Mrs Y) would have to contribute towards home care services. The social worker directed Mrs X to the Council’s website for more information about this.
15. There is no evidence to show that Mrs Y, Mrs X or other family members objected to the proposed care package, or that the family were pressurised into accepting care. An email dated 2 August 2021 confirms Mrs X’s agreement to the care package, “Thank you. The hours are not what mum is used to re getting up and going to bed but I'm sure it'll work out. I'd rather have this arrangement and have her home than her stay in the home”.
16. Mrs X believes Mrs Y should have received a period of reablement care on discharge from hospital as the service would have been better placed to assess her immediate needs, determine any potential for rehabilitation and assess any ongoing needs.
17. For people in hospital, it is the NHS, not the Council that makes decisions/referrals for reablement care. In this case the NHS decided such a referral was not appropriate.
18. Mrs Y returned home on 9 August 2021 with four care visits per day.
19. The Council reviewed Mrs Y’s needs on 17 September 2021, following which visits were reduced to two per day.
20. Mrs X says Mrs Y incurred costs for care she did not need, and she believes the Council should waive the cost of two daily care visits.
21. Mrs X submitted a formal complaint to the Council. The Council’s response, dated 28 January 2022, sets out the points of complaint and responds to each point in detail.

Analysis

22. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made decisions. We may criticise a council if it has, for example, not followed an appropriate procedure, failed to take account of relevant evidence, or not properly explained the reason for its decision. But we do not make decisions on councils’ behalf or offer a right of appeal against their decisions. We cannot criticise a council’s decision where it has been made properly, and nor can we uphold a complaint simply because a person disagrees with what a council has done.
23. The evidence shows that overall, the Council assessed Mrs Y’s care needs properly. It took account of all relevant information and Mrs Y’s wishes. The Council identified Mrs Y had eligible care needs and provided care to meet those meets. Assessments were completed in line with the Care Act and Statutory Guidance. There was no fault in the process.
24. It is clear the Council and Mrs X have different positions on the information provided by a social worker. Complaints like this are often difficult to consider when it relates to verbal conversations. We are reliant on any available surrounding evidence that may provide any information about the issues being complained about.
25. Emails between Mrs X and the Council show Mrs X was aware of and agreed with the proposed care package. There is no evidence which shows Mrs Y, Mrs X or other family members were pressured into accepting care, or that objections were raised.
26. The Council reviewed Mrs Y’s care within six weeks of her returning home and adjusted the number of daily care visits accordingly. Mrs X was also given timely information about the Council’s charging policy. There was no fault here.
27. There was no fault in the way the Council dealt with Mrs X’s complaint about the above matters. The written complaint response addresses and responds to each point satisfactorily.

Back to top

Final decision

28. There was no fault in the way the Council assessed Mrs Y’s care needs and no fault in the subsequent decisions made about the care she needed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman