Summary: Mr X complained the Council had not provided adequate Adult Social Care services to his son Mr Y, causing distress. We did investigate complaints about matters that arose more than 12 months ago or that were premature. We found the Council at fault for delay in completing a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y. We recommended it pay Mr X £500 for the distress and uncertainty suffered by him and Mr Y and arrange the assessment.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council:
• delayed carrying out a specialist autism assessment for his son, Mr Y;
• refused to accept specialist assessments commissioned by Mr X;
• did not complete a lawful care assessment and support plan for Mr Y until April 2021;
• refused direct payments in 2018;
• demonstrated a poor attitude and bullying behaviour;
• made errors in complaint responses.
2. Mr X says the Council’s actions caused distress to him, his late wife and Mr Y. He also considers this worsened the health of his wife.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated Mr X’s complaint that the Council delayed carrying out a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y. At the end of this decision I have explained why I have not investigated other matters.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. 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)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
7. 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

8. I spoke to Mr X and I reviewed documents provided by Mr X and the Council.
9. I gave Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

10. Mr X says he asked the Council for additional support for Mr Y in 2017 but this was not forthcoming. He says the lack of support caused the family stress and worsened his wife’s health.
11. In October 2019 Mrs X passed away.
12. The Council has provided a copy of a care assessment completed for Mr Y in August 2019. In addition to a statement of need and a care and support plan completed in October 2019. These show Mr Y was to receive 70 hours’ support per week; 10 hours daily.
13. The Council has provided a copy of a care assessment completed for Mr Y in November 2020. In addition to a statement of need and a care and support plan completed in January 2021. These show Mr Y was to receive 70 hours’ support per week; 10 hours daily.
14. Mr X says he received the care and support plan of January 2021 in April 2021.
15. Mr X complained to the Council in April 2022. In summary he said:
• The Council had agreed to carry out a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y in August 2019 yet had still not done so;
• The Council had delayed completing a lawful assessment and care and support plan until the plan received in April 2021, leaving Mr Y four years without the support he needed;
• The Council refused to state Mr Y required 24/7 support until the plan received in April 2021;
• The Council had finally agreed to provide Mr Y with 20 hours’ additional support and accepted he needed care 24/7, but Mr Y should have got this support sooner.
• The Council wrongly refused direct payments in 2018.
16. The Council responded in May. In summary it:
• Acknowledged its delay in arranging the autism assessment, apologised and said it would take action to arrange this;
• Accepted there was a delay following his request for more support in 2017 to it completing an assessment in 2019. It apologised for this delay. It noted Mr Y’s plans provided for 50 hours’ support which increased to 70 hours from 2019.
• Said all the assessments completed since 2017 recorded that Mr Y had high levels of need in relation to which he required support throughout the day and night. However, the assessments have not always stated, explicitly, that he requires support 24/7. It apologised for any frustration or distress caused.
• It referred Mr X to the Ombudsman.
17. In response to our enquiries the Council said:
• It commissioned a doctor to complete a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y in relation to his diagnosis of Autism and his eligibility for services under the Care Act. This was delayed by COVID-19 and then subsequently the doctor’s illness and then retirement. It was actively seeking an independent specialist. It had contacted three but they did not have any availability. It would continue to seek someone.
• If Mr X would like to send it the Autism assessments he had in relation to Mr Y’s needs, it would consider the contents in relation to Mr Y’s adult social care assessment and record them where relevant.
• It gave Mr X copies of its Assessments, Statement of needs and Care and Support plans. If Mr X was not happy with the contents then it was happy to meet with him and consider any amendments. Any amendments must have an evidential basis.
• It did not try to block direct payments. Historically there was confusion about payments in relation to Mr Y’s personal assistant and an agency that he had been working for. Direct payments were backdated to cover Mr Y’s costs and have been paid consistently since May 2020.
• Its officer had no recollection of having a conversation with Mr X about the department being vindictive, unhelpful and unsympathetic to his situation. This officer’s last recorded conversation with Mr X was in 2018.
• Mr Y’s care and support plan does not specifically mention that he needs support 24/7. But there are clear indications that Mr Y has high needs, throughout the day and night, and an intensive risk management plan is in place to meet those needs.
• A review of Mr Y’s needs can be arranged and the information that Mr Y needs 24 hour support can be added subject to evidence of this.
18. When I spoke to Mr X he said:
• The latest care plan of January 2021 was still not correct; though he had not yet complained to the Council about this;
• He was unsure if he had asked the Council to accept his own assessments in the last 12 months; though he had requested such in the past;
• He accepted the Council had paid direct payments since May 2020. He did not complain to the Ombudsman about this previously because his solicitor was trying to resolve this with the Council;
• He did not complain to the Ombudsman about the care and support plans earlier because his solicitor was trying to resolve this with the Council;
• The Council had not reviewed Mr Y’s care and support plan since January 2021;
• He thought he complained of the Council’s bullying behaviour in his complaint of April 2022. If not, he had certainly raised this with the Council previously, though it may not have kept records;
• The Council should have sent him the minutes of each review meeting but it did not do so. He did not recall asking for minutes following the last review of January 2021 but had asked for these in the past;
• His concerns about the Council’s complaints handling do not relate to its May 2022 response but earlier issues.
• During COVID-19 it was impossible to make complaints with the Council. This remained the case for at least a year. He enclosed a screenshot said to be taken from the Council’s website in July 2020. This says the Ombudsman is not currently accepting complaints.
19. I acknowledge the Ombudsman did not accept new complaints for a few months in spring 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our website and phone communications told complainants to keep checking back for when we would reopen.
20. In comments on a draft decision Mr X:
• Said the Council’s complaint response of May 2022 did not address all matters raised;
• Commented on the Council’s response to my enquiries that:
1. It did not address concerns in 2019 as claimed;
2. He had correspondence from the Council stating the doctor had completed their specialist autism assessment and considers it unlikely he would not have done so before retiring;
3. He had sent the Council numerous professional reports over the years but they appear to have been lost or ignored;
4. He has had concerns with every care and support plan issued by the Council over the last 20 years. He raised concerns with the Council but was often ignored or received an initial response but very rarely made progress;
5. He maintained the Council did try to block direct payments;
6. His last conversation with the officer complained of was July 2018 and he is not surprised they deny the conversation as reported, though it took place;
7. He has provided evidence previously showing Mr Y requires 24/7 support;
8. He previously requested an increase from 10 to 13 hours’ support per day that the Council has not addressed.
• Explained further why he did not complain to the Ombudsman about matters sooner. Namely, the Council would fob them off and they would move on; COVID delayed matters; his wife’s death in 2019 also meant he did not want to pursue matters and his solicitor was separately pursuing the Council over this period;
• Clarified it was the Council that would not accept complaints in 2020 rather than the Ombudsman;
• Provided evidence relevant to those earlier complaints.

My findings

21. The Council accepts it delayed carrying out a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y from August 2019 to date. This is fault. While I accept there may have been some unavoidable delay due to COVID-19 restrictions, the Council should have found an alternative once it was clear the doctor commissioned was unavailable in the long term. That it has only contacted three other providers to date is not adequate action. Mr X and Mr Y have suffered distress and uncertainty over three years because of the Council’s fault, this is injustice.
22. I will not further investigate whether the Council previously told Mr X the assessment was complete. This is because any miscommunication in this regard would not cause any further significant injustice. The Council told the Ombudsman it had not completed the assessment since August 2019 and I have already found fault and injustice in this regard.
23. The Ombudsman does not usually investigate complaints about the Council’s complaint handling where we are not investigating the substantive matter raised. The Council’s complaint response of May 2022 addressed the complaint regarding the autism assessment. I will not comment on other matters that I am not investigating, as this is neither appropriate nor proportionate.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. To remedy the injustice set out above the Council should carry out the following actions within one month of the date of my decision:
• Pay Mr X £500 for the distress and uncertainty caused to him and Mr Y due to the delayed autism assessment;
• Arrange a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y.
25. The Council has accepted my recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I find the Council at fault for its delay carrying out a specialist autism assessment for Mr Y. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

27. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaints that the Council:
• refused to accept specialist assessments commissioned by Mr X;
• did not complete a lawful care assessment and support plan for Mr Y until April 2021;
• refused direct payments in 2018;
• demonstrated a poor attitude and bullying behaviour;
• made errors in complaint responses.
28. This is because I am satisfied these complaints arose more than 12 months ago and are late. I have considered Mr X’s circumstances however I remain satisfied he could have brought complaints to the Ombudsman sooner if he wished. There is no good reason for me to exercise discretion to investigate.
29. Mr X has not yet complained to the Council about the content of the January 2021 care and support plan. This complaint is therefore premature but it is also out of time. I note the Council says it is happy to consider Mr X’s concerns. I do not consider there is good reason to accept a late complaint or one that the Council has not yet had chance to address.
30. Mr X says the Council has not reviewed Mr Y’s care plan since January 2021. This is premature and I consider it reasonable to give the Council the chance to respond to this complaint. I expect the Council to address this now it has been brought to its attention. If Mr X remains unhappy following the Council’s response he may bring a complaint to the Ombudsman.
31. In comments on a draft decision Mr X added that the Council had not addressed a request for an increase in Mr Y’s care hours from 10 to 13 daily. However, this was not part of his recent complaint to the Council or the Ombudsman. Mr X may complete the Council’s complaints process if he has not done so already. He may also contact the Ombudsman again if unresolved and we will consider if we can and should investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman