Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s delay completing his Occupational Therapy assessment, and its poor communication. We find the Council at fault, which delayed Mr X receiving minor adaptations. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s delay completing his Occupational Therapy assessment and its poor communication.
2. He says this has impacted his physical and mental health and delayed his request to move to a more suitable property.
3. Mr X wants the Council to send him his OT assessment and compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. 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

7. I considered Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I also discussed the complaint with Mr X.
8. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, (a copy of which can be found on our website).
9. Mr X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Assessments

10. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require councils to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to everyone regardless of their finances or whether the council thinks the person has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
11. The Care and Support statutory guidance says (at 6.29) councils must carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Councils should tell people when their assessment will take place and keep them informed throughout the assessment.

What happened

12. In November 2023, Mr X completed an online self-assessment to request support from the Occupational Therapy (OT) Team at the Council. A few days later, an Occupational Therapist called Mr X, who explained he was having difficulty with the stairs, accessing the shower, toilet transfers, and accessing his home. He told the Occupational Therapist that he was on the Council’s Housing list and wanted to move to level access accommodation.
13. In April 2024, an Occupational Therapist was allocated to his case. Over the next week, the Occupational Therapist attempted to contact Mr X three times but received no response. A “no contact” letter was recorded as sent. Mr X says he called the OT Team four times the following week, and during one call, a team administrator took a message for someone to return his call.
14. Later that month, Mr X complained to the Council about the delay in receiving an assessment and the lack of response to his phone call.
15. In May 2024, the OT Team Leader called Mr X, but received no answer. They sent an email asking him to contact the Team to arrange a visit. Mr X called back, and a visit arranged for the following day.
16. During the assessment, Mr X’s concerns were noted as overcrowded living conditions and unaffordable rent. The assessment recommended a stair rail and grab rail, which were later provided. However, it concluded that Mr X did not need an adapted property. He was advised to bid on any property and re-refer to the OT Team for minor adaptations if needed. A Rehousing Report was completed and sent to the Council’s Housing Team to support Mr X’s housing application.
17. Later that month, the Council responded to his complaint. It upheld his complaint and apologised for the delays and communication issues. It explained a “no contact” letter was sent after unsuccessful attempts to reach him, and his call was not returned due to staff absence. The Council attributed the delays to a high demand for OT services and staff shortages, but noted that recruitment had taken place, improving waiting times.
18. Mr X was unhappy with the response and requested a copy of the “no contact” letter, as he had not received it, along with the Rehousing Report.
19. In the same month, Mr X brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.
20. At the end of the month, the Council provided the Rehousing Report as requested. It also acknowledged that the “no contact” letter was not sent due to human error and apologised for this. The Council said it would remind staff of the importance of sending such correspondence and would share the matter with the Council’s Professional Standards Team for oversight.

My findings

21. Mr X requested an OT assessment in November 2023. The Council did not complete his assessment until May 2024. Although there is no statutory timescale for completing an OT assessment, the statutory guidance says it should be completed in an appropriate and reasonable timescale. In this case the Council took 24 weeks. In the circumstances of Mr X’s case, in my view there was an unacceptable delay. This delay was fault. I cannot say, on balance, what the outcome of the OT assessment would have been if completed sooner. However, I have seen no evidence that Mr X’s needs significantly changed between November and May. I therefore find that the delay in assessing Mr X’s needs resulted in a delay providing him with the necessary minor adaptations.
22. In Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman, he raised that the delay in assessment has delayed his request to move to a more suitable property. The OT assessment concluded that he did not require an adapted property. Therefore, I find, the delay in assessing Mr X did not delay his request to move but it did cause him distress and uncertainty.
23. The Council acknowledged it should have sent Mr X a “no contact” letter when it could not contact him but failed to do so. This was fault. The Council has since apologised to Mr X and taken steps to prevent this from happening again. Since Mr X was contacting the Council, the missing letter did not further delay his assessment, and there is no remaining injustice to him.
24. The Council explained the reason for the delay in responding to Mr X’s call in April. The week after the call, Mr X’s OT assessment took place. I find no fault in the Council’s actions in this instance but acknowledge the distress it caused him.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. To remedy the injustice to Mr X from the faults I have identified, within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• apologise to Mr X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology; and
• pay Mr X £200 in recognition of the effect of the delay providing the minor adaptations he required; and
• pay Mr X £100 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty caused by the delay in completing his OT assessment.
26. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation and find fault by the Council which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to the above action as a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman