Summary: Ms C complained the Council failed to assess the care and support needs of her son which meant he lived in poor conditions for longer than necessary and suffered avoidable anxiety and distress. We have found fault in the delay in completing the assessment but consider the agreed action of a symbolic payment and procedural review provides a suitable remedy in addition to the apology already provided.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms C, complains on behalf of her son Mr X who has a progressive and serious neurological condition that the Council failed to assess his care needs or provide support between October 2022 and January 2023.
2. Ms C says because of the Council’s fault her son lived in poor conditions for longer than necessary and suffered avoidable anxiety and distress and the lack of support led to him moving in with her to provide support which is stressful and exhausting.

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. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), 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. I read the papers provided by Ms C and discussed the complaint with her. I have considered the Council’s response to my enquiries. I have explained my draft decision to Ms C and the Council and considered the comments received before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Ms C telephoned the Council towards the end of October 2022 about her son and the problems he was having with daily living due to illness. Ms C explained Mr X was waiting for a confirmed diagnosis but a serious neurological condition was suspected. Ms C further explained Mr X was struggling with the stairs at his privately rented first floor flat which was in a mess and he had rent arrears. Ms C also explained Mr X had serious difficulties in caring for himself.
7. A duty social worker telephoned Mr X at the end of October. Mr X provided information about his health and the difficulties he was experiencing with day to day living. The social worker explained Mr X would be placed on an allocations list for a Care Act assessment.
8. An occupational therapist (OT) completed a telephone assessment with Mr X to support an application for re-housing at the beginning of November. This recorded Mr X was struggling to access his property due to the communal stairs and also had difficulties using the shower.
9. The Council spoke to Mr X in early December and he provided similar information about the difficulties he was facing. The Council confirmed it would contact him to arrange a Care Act assessment. Mr X explained he had been waiting for an assessment since the end of October.
10. The Council was advised Mr X was admitted to hospital following a fall in early December. The case notes at this point say Mr X was not known to Housing Options and needed to be allocated to them for support to be rehoused and allocated for an assessment of need. The Council left a telephone message for Mr X to say he needed to contact Housing Options directly about his housing situation.
11. The Council spoke to Mr X in mid-December and established he remained in hospital. Mr X confirmed he was happy for a referral to be made about his housing situation and confirmed he had received a notice to leave from his landlord.
12. The Council spoke to Mr X towards the end of December. Mr X provided a repeat of the information about his condition and the impact on his daily living. The Council telephoned Ms C following this contact. Ms C explained Mr X would need to be discharged to a suitable placement on a short term basis until a permanent home could be found. Ms C confirmed Mr X’s flat had been cleared and he would not be returning. Ms C explained Mr X needed 24 hour support and discharge to a flat would not be suitable.
13. The case notes record the OT referral was closed towards the end of December as Mr X would be accommodated on a short term basis in residential care and would be assessed at a later stage for a suitable long term placement which would meet his needs.
14. The Council allocated a social worker to Mr X at the end of December when he was considered medially fit to be assessed. The Council spoke to Mr X and confirmed he was aware of and accepted the suggestion of residential care on a short term basis while more suitable accommodation was found. The case notes show the Council’s efforts to find a suitable short term residential placement for Mr X.
15. Mr X was discharged to a short term placement in early January 2023.
16. Ms C complained to the Council in January about the way her request for help in October 2022 had been handled and that an assessment of Mr X’s needs had still not been completed.
17. The Council completed a Care Act assessment with Mr X towards the end of January at the placement and Ms C took part by telephone. This found Mr X had eligible care and support needs. A support plan was not subsequently generated as Mr X moved out of the Council’s area (see below).
18. The Council advised the placement had been made under the hospital discharge process and another short term placement would need to be identified. The Council identified a suitable short term placement towards the end of January and advised Mr X.
19. The Council was advised at the end of January by the existing placement that a friend had driven Mr X to stay with his mother in London and he intended to apply for services there. With Mr X’s consent, the Council shared a copy of the Care Act assessment with the Authority that would have responsibility for support going forward.
20. The Council responded to Ms C’s complaint in February and apologised for the delay in doing so. This response acknowledged that it should have allocated a social worker to Mr X following the initial contact in October 2022 but was not able to do so due to the demand being experienced by its community teams. The Council apologised for the frustration caused by repeated conversations Mr X had with different professionals.
21. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance says that an assessment should be carried out over an appropriate and reasonable timescale, taking into account the urgency of needs and considering any fluctuation in them.
22. The Council has already accepted there was delay in allocating Mr X a social worker which meant there was a delay in gathering relevant information and completing his assessment. We would normally expect councils to complete assessments in a timescale that is proportionate to the complexity of the issues, and normally within 4-6 weeks. On balance, in the circumstances of this case I would have expected an assessment to be at least underway and possibly completed before Mr X’s admission to hospital in December. I consider there was avoidable delay here which is fault.
23. I am satisfied this delay caused Mr X avoidable frustration in having to provide the same information on repeated occasions and uncertainty about any support he would receive. This injustice was aggravated by Mr X’s existing anxiety due to his diagnosis and housing situation and requires a remedy in addition to the apology already provided by the Council. However, I cannot say what impact this delay had on the decision for Mr X to move to live with his mother as this is too speculative and dependant on various factors.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. The Council will take the following action to provide a suitable remedy:
1. make a symbolic payment of £300 to Mr X to recognise the avoidable frustration and uncertainty caused by its delay in allocating a social worker and completing an assessment of his care needs within one month of my final decision; and
2. review its procedure and prepare a plan to address any backlog in allocating a social worker when an assessment is requested and to ensure Care Act assessments are completed over an appropriate and reasonable timescale within three months of my final decision.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above action.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have completed my investigation as I have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action above provides a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman