Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s handling of care needs assessments and provision or funding of care and support services. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council before a scheduled review shortly before the complaint to us, and it is open to Mr B to complain to the Council about more specific elements of later decisions and events, so we could achieve not worthwhile outcome by investigating now.

The complaint

1. Mr B say, for his relative Mr C, the Council has failed to:
1. assess or review Mr C’s care and support needs since 2014;
2. provide enough funding for the care and support services Mr C uses so Mr B has had to make up the shortfall over several years;
3. treat transport costs over the level of Mr C’s Personal Independence Payment (PIP) for mobility as disability related expenditure (DRE) when assessing his finances for care charging; and
4. assess his needs correctly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council’s complaint response says its records show it carried out assessments or reviews in 2014, 2018, 2021, and 2023, and had scheduled another for September 2024. I have seen no evidence to counter that.
6. Mr B is unhappy the Council wished to review its needs assessment with Mr C in person, which he says would cause Mr C extreme distress and affect his behaviour because of his disability. The Council may by law decide it needs to assess someone’s needs in person. We would not criticise it for doing so in
   Mr C’s case, especially as Mr B is unhappy with previous assessments.
7. The funding for the services Mr C uses, his contribution, and his transport costs all appear connected:
• The Council must provide a personal budget which is enough to buy services to meet the eligible care and support needs a person has based on assessing their needs, not wants.
• The Council has described how it has increased its funding to meet rising costs. It also says a shortfall in the budget arose because Mr B had not ensured Mr C’s assessed contribution towards the cost of his care and support was paid in.
• Mr B has complained the Council decided not to allow transport costs which exceed Mr C’s PIP mobility allowance as DRE which would therefore reduce his care and support charges. He has also described how some of those costs are not to do with meeting Mr C’s assessed care and support needs, but trips he chooses to make with family members because he enjoys them.
• Mr B says Mr C does not understand why he cannot do the things he once enjoyed doing due to lack of finances.
8. The Council does not have a duty to fund all the activities Mr C might want to engage in. It is open to Mr B to complain to the Council about
1. specific faults he sees in any more recent care and support needs assessment, and updated plan following the review scheduled for September 2024;
2. a fresh budget decision from the Council about funding to meet Mr C’s eligible support needs; and
3. assessment of the contribution Mr C should make towards those costs based on his finances.

But Mr B’s complaint to us is not specific enough or based on the most recent events for us to achieve anything by investigating it.

9. Subject to this, there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council expecting
   Mr C’s PIP mobility allowance to be available to cover his cost of travelling to his care services, and his finances to cover the cost of his care in line with the law.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman