Summary: We will not investigate the complaint about the adequacy of Council social care support provided to the complainant. This is because we have not identified any evidence of fault with the Council’s communication with the complainant, or how it is assessed her needs for care and safeguarding referrals made on her behalf. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Ms W) complains about the adequacy of social care support provided to her by the Council. Ms W says she has care needs and requires social support, but the Council is refusing her access to these services and is failing to respond to or engage with her concerns. Ms W also says the Council will not return her calls and it is failing to provide needed communication support.
2. In addition, Ms W explains she uses a wheelchair which needs repairing and that she is housebound. She adds that she has no financial income and is being left in a vulnerable position. Despite this, Ms W complains the Council has ignored safeguarding alerts made on her behalf. In summary, she explains she is being denied social care support which she needs and this is causing her to be vulnerable and at risk of harm. As a desired outcome, Ms W wants the Council to engage with her about her needs and provide the needed social care services.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the per-son making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify this. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
4. We cannot investigate a complaint where the body complained about is not responsible for the issue or problem being raised. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(1), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code. The complainant was given an opportunity to provide any further information or evidence about this complaint.

Back to top

My assessment

a) Care assessment

6. Importantly, Ms W has complained to the Ombudsman previously about the same core issues. We issued a decision relating to these matters last in November 2022. Ms W has expressed dissatisfaction with these decisions and as part of this complaint has asked we address the matters raised to us previously. The Ombudsman will not accept a complaint we have previously considered and decided. This has been explained to Ms W on a number of occassions. I will not therefore revisit matters which have occurred before November 2022. My assessment is limited to events prior to this date.
7. The available evidence shows the Council has sought to assess Ms W’s general needs for care and support over an extended period. To assist gathering Ms W’s views with respect to her needs, the Council appointed an independent advocate for her in December 2022. The Council visited Ms W in February 2023 with her advocate present to obtain necessary information as part of the care assessment process. I note that Council professionals had attempted two earlier visits, though say these were unsuccessful due to a lack of engagement by Ms W. Following this visit, the evidence shows the Council made referrals to occupational health (OH) professionals to assess Ms W’s needs with respect to adaptions to her kitchen and bathroom. The care assessment report records Ms W was contacted by its OH team. It says Ms W would not cooperate in accepting an assessment and so it closed the referral.
8. The Council subsequently completed the care assessment process in August 2023 and shared its report with Ms W. The report shows the assessment considered relevant information given by Ms W and how her reported health needs impact on her daily living activities. I also note Ms W has not provided me with specific information or evidence which shows why the decision wrong. Rather, she has presented a complaint that the Council is simply not engaging with her denies it has visited her to assess her needs. Ms W’s perception of events is not borne out by the evidence. I have not identified any fault in how the Council has considered the information presented by Ms W to reach a decision about her eligibility for social care services in accordance the Care Act 2014.
9. Separate to the needs assessed in the Council’s report, it has also considered Ms W’s request for an autism assessment made in May 2023. This resulted in her GP making a referral to an NHS hospital trust the same month. The Council says attempts to undertake this with Ms W were unsuccessful. This view is supported by GP records which are independent of the Council and outline Ms W initially declined any referral being made so an assessment could take place. I note however Ms W later gave consent for a referral in December 2023. The Council says the assessment was carried out in May 2024 and it is awaiting for the formal report before it can consider Ms W’s needs and any areas of support.
10. The Council acknowledges Ms W has not received as thorough an assessment as it would have liked, though it says this is due to lack of participation by Ms W, including with face to face to visits and requests for further assessments from other professionals. In my view, the evidence supports this view. The information and documents I have considered shows a wide range of Council and third party medical and social care professionals recording views of Ms W being obstructive and refusing to engage with attempts to provide support and services. The Council’s current assessed view is Ms W can meet her needs independently. It has not identified any eligible needs within the meaning of the Care Act 2014. I am satisfied the Council has, on the information it has been able to ascertain, complied with its duty to assess and try to understand whether Ms W has needs which are eligible for social care assistance. The evidence shows the Council will keep this under review, particularly when it receives the report of Ms W’s autism assessment. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

b) Adult safeguarding

11. Ms W complains the Council has ignored safeguarding referrals it has received from her friends. She says the referrals were made because the lack of social care support makes her vulnerable and at risk of harm. I requested evidence of the referrals made to the Council and how these had been considered. The Council provided with me copies of the last two referrals made which shows they were assessed at initial screening. The Council decided the referral did not meet the threshold for formal safeguarding action because they did not provide any new information about issues it was not already involved in supporting. This is supported by the evidence as the referrals relate to Ms W’s concerns about her health, benefits and support needs. The referrals have been properly assessed by the Council using the appropriate framework under the Care Act 2014 and it is entitled to decide on taking no further action.
12. I have considered Ms W’s complaint that the absence of social care and support has left her housebound. She says the Council is not supporting her mobility difficulties by servicing her wheelchair. The available evidence records an NHS wheelchair service made visits to Ms W in October and November 2023 but were refused access due to lack of cooperation. The Council says the service has since carried out repairs to Ms W’s wheelchair in March and May 2024. The Council has maintained oversight of these issues.
13. Further, Ms W explains she has no income which adds to her vulnerability and risk of harm. She complains the Council has not offered appropriate support in getting her benefits reinstated. The benefits referred to by Ms W are administered by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) which is not a body we can investigate by law. We have no jurisdiction to investigate why these were stopped, nor can we remedy this. In any event, the documentary evidence shows the Council providing assistance in this area. It says the DWP has informed there are ongoing investigations in relation to Ms W’s benefits and that these cannot be reinstated until she makes contact with the DWP and engages with its enquiries.
14. The available evidence is not consistent with Ms W’s perception the Council is refusing to engage, communicate and support her with respect to adult social care services. The Council has, and continues to engage with Ms W. We have previously considered and decided on these issues in a separate complaint by Ms W. I have not identified any evidence of fault with the Council’s communication with her since then, or its care assessment and safeguarding actions.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman