Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his residential care. We find the Council at fault for a delay in advising Mr X of changes to his care. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not advise him of changes to his care provider, delayed in moving him to a new home and did not deal with his complaints fully. Mr X says this impacted his mental health as well as his relationship with his partner (Ms B), who was liaising with the Council on his behalf. Mr X would like the Council to help him move.

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’. 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)
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. We spoke to Ms B about his complaint and considered information she provided. We also considered information received from the Council.
5. We also sent out draft decision to Mr X, Ms B and the Council. I have considered the responses received.

Back to top

What I found

Legislative Background

Fundamental standards of Care

6. The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 set out the fundamental standards those registered to provide care services must achieve.
7. Regulation 9 “Person Centred Care” says care providers should enable and support relevant people to make or participate in making, decisions relating to the service user's care or treatment to the maximum extent possible…”.

Choice of care homes

8. The Care and Support and Aftercare (Choice of Accommodation) Regulations 2014 set out what people should expect from a council when it arranges a care home place for them. Where the care planning process has determined a person’s needs are best met in a care home, the council must provide for the person’s preferred choice of accommodation, subject to certain conditions.

What happened

9. The information below is a summary of relevant events, and does not include every everything that happened during this period.

Change in care provider

10. Mr X lives in a care home. The Council’s records show that in October 2023 staff at the home were providing personal care to Mr X. The records also show that the relationship between Mr X and the staff providing care had been difficult. Mr X had complained about the care provided on a number of occasions.
11. That month, the care provider wrote to the Council and said that staff were finding it hard to provide care to Mr X due to his behaviour. It said it would no longer be providing personal care to Mr X. It asked the Council to find an external provider for Mr X’s personal care.
12. The following week, the Council contacted Ms B to advise of the care provider’s request for the change. It said it was in the process of finding a new provider. It also suggested direct payments to Mr X so he could source his own provider.
13. Ms B contacted the Council unhappy with the change of care provider. The care provider had not informed them when they had recently met. The Council apologised on behalf of the care provider.
14. The Council says it needed to find a new care provider, to ensure there were no gaps in Mr X’s care. It accepts that it could have contacted Mr X sooner to advise him of this. Mr X says that the change in care caused him worry and anxiety. He says he was unsure of whether the new provider could meet his needs, and felt he had no choice in his care. The Council advised Mr X he could request a new care provider.

Move to another property

15. The evidence shows Mr X was unhappy with where he was living. He was on a waiting list for a move to a new flat. In late 2023 he discussed moving with the Council, and it identified a property which he was happy with.
16. However, the Council explained to Mr X the property required significant alterations to meet his needs, and this would take a long time. It explained the waiting time was over 12 months.
17. During 2023 and early 2024 Mr X became increasingly unhappy with his living arrangements. He told the Council numerous times that he felt he needed to move for his mental health and wellbeing. The Council explained that the alterations needed to be made before Mr X could move, and that this would take time.
18. In May 2024 a Council internal email advised that Mr X had spoken to an officer and advised he would like to wait where he was as he could move around there. If he went to the new flat, he would be stuck inside. Ms B disputes whether Mr X made those comments.
19. In response to our enquiries the Council advised its occupational therapy team were involved with Mr X and working with him and Ms B to progress his move.

Complaint handling

20. Mr X raised complaints with the Council on numerous occasions. The care records show that complaints made by Mr X were dealt with by the Council throughout 2023.
21. In December 2023 Ms B wrote to the Council as Mr X was unhappy with the responses he had received to his complaints. The Council responded and addressed the issues raised. However it said that, at times, some of the complaints were repetitive in nature and this could be considered vexatious. It explained that this was time consuming and was not an effective use of resources. For this reason, it said any repeat complaints would, potentially, be referred to the Corporate Complaint team to assess.

Analysis

Change in care provider

22. It was not the Council’s decision to outsource Mr X’s care. The care provider decided it would no longer provide personal care to him. Once this decision had been made, the Council had a duty to provide alternative care for Mr X. This was to ensure Mr X did not have any gaps in his care.
23. However, the Council accepted that it could have contacted Mr X sooner to discuss this change with him. That was fault. Mr X felt he had no say in his care arrangements and was worried about the change. The lack of communication caused uncertainty, which is injustice.

Move to another home

24. When Mr X asked to move, the Council told him there would be a long wait as the property needed to be adapted to meet his needs.
25. While this was frustrating for Mr X, the Council needed to ensure the new property was suitable for his needs, even if this took time to put in place. Mr X was aware of the reasons for the long wait, although it was clearly frustrating for him.
26. The Council’s records say Mr X later advised he had decided to stay in his current home. Ms B disputes he said this. This is a conflict in evidence. If there is a conflict of evidence, we try to make findings based on the balance of probabilities. But with this complaint I cannot say, even on the balance of probabilities, what more likely happened. And I do not consider that further investigation would resolve these conflicting accounts of the conversations which took place. So I cannot uphold this part of the complaint.

Complaint handling

27. The Council’s records show that in general it responded to, and acted upon, concerns raised by Mr X in a timely manner.
28. However, Mr X raised the same complaints on a number of occasions. It was reasonable for the Council to explain that it would no longer respond to these complaints Mr X raised them again. I have seen no evidence the Council told Mr X it would not deal with any new complaints. I see no evidence of fault with this part of Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. To address the injustice identified above, the Council has agreed to our recommendation to carry out the following actions:
30. Within one month:
• provide Mr X with a written apology for the injustice identified above. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings;
• pay Mr X £100 to acknowledge the uncertainty caused by a delay in communication about the change in his care arrangements.
31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I uphold the complaint as I find fault for a delay in communicating with Mr X about a change in his care arrangements. As the Council has accepted my recommendations, I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman