Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not properly consider his reasonable adjustments. He says this caused him stress and anxiety. The Ombudsman finds no fault with the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council:

1. did not properly consider his reasonable adjustments;
2. did not respond to his Subject Access Request;
3. did not provide him with a carer’s assessment;
4. communicated with him poorly; and
5. handled his complaint poorly.

2. Mr X says this caused him significant stress and anxiety.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. Mr X says he has not yet brought his complaint about the Council’s handling of his Subject Access Request to the Information Commissioner’s Office. For this reason, I will not investigate part b of the complaint.
7. I have investigated parts a, c, d and e of the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered the information and documents provided by Mr X and the Council. Mr X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on the draft of this decision. I have considered their comments before making this final decision.
9. I also considered the relevant statutory guidance, and Council’s policy and guidance, as set out below.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Reasonable adjustments (part a of the complaint)

10. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body which carries out a public function. It aims to make sure that a disabled person can use a service as close as it is reasonably possible to get to the standard usually offered to non-disabled people.
11. Service providers are under a positive and proactive duty to take steps to remove or prevent obstacles to accessing their service. If the adjustments are reasonable, they must make them.

Carer’s assessment (part b of the complaint)

12. Where somebody provides or intends to provide care for another adult and it appears the carer may have any needs for support, the council must carry out a carer’s assessment. A carer’s assessment must seek to find out not only the carer’s needs for support, but also the sustainability of the caring role itself. This includes the practical and emotional support the carer provides to the adult.
13. A carer may choose to refuse an assessment. In these circumstances councils do not have to carry out an assessment. Where a council identifies that an adult lacks mental capacity and that carrying out a needs assessment would be in the adult’s best interests, it must do so.

Communication (part d of the complaint)

14. The Council has issued guidance on how to identify and manage unreasonable customer behaviour. It defines two broad categories of unreasonable customer behaviour. The first is aggressive or abusive behaviour and the second is unreasonable persistence and demands.
15. It states examples of unreasonable persistence and demands include;
• a continual refusal to accept a decision or explanation
• a repeated refusal to follow an appropriate course of action e.g. the complaints procedure
• constant contact with a service or particular employee (by either telephone, email, letter or personal visits) about the same issues without presenting new information
• contacting multiple officers about a particular issue
16. It states it should give the customer an opportunity to change their behaviour by informing them their behaviour is unacceptable.
17. It states if unreasonable behaviour continues, employees can:
• end telephone calls, clearly explain and record why they are ending the call
• refuse to take a telephone call and direct to another officer
• advise the customer that they will not respond to further correspondence about an issue they have already responded to, where no new information is provided.

Complaint handling (part e of the complaint)

18. The Council’s website says it aims is to provide a full response to a stage one complaint within 10 working days. It says it will let complainants know it is going to take longer.
19. The Council’s website says if complainants are unhappy with stage one complaint response they can escalate their complaint to stage two. It says the complainant should make their request to the Customer Relations Team. The request will be passed to a Customer Relations Investigator who is independent of the service you are complaining about.
20. The Customer Relations Investigator will review the complaint and:
1. carry out a further investigation, or
2. refer the request back to the service you are complaining about with a request to reconsider all, or specific parts, of your complaint.
21. It says if the Council decides to carry out a further investigation, they will aim to provide a response within 20 working days. If the investigator needs to confirm details of the complaint with the complainant it will be 20 working days from that point. If, for any reason, the investigator is unable to keep to this timescale they will keep the complainant informed.

What happened

22. Prior to 2024, the Council completed a carers assessment for Mr X. The assessment detailed Mr X was seeking a diagnosis for autism.
23. In summer 2024, Mr X regularly contacted different officers across the Council regarding a previous complaint about incorrect records.
24. In June, the Council returned Mr X’s phone call. He raised his previous complaint about incorrect records which had already been discussed. During the call the Council asked him for some information which he declined to provide. The Council also offered another carer’s assessment which he declined. Mr X made a formal complaint. Shortly afterwards, he withdrew this complaint.
25. Mr X continued to contact the Council about his previous complaint.
26. In mid-July, the Council emailed Mr X and apologised it had been unable to resolve the matter about incorrect records to his satisfaction. It told him it had responded to his queries and concerns respectfully. It asked him to refrain writing such emails to the team and directed him to make future complaints using the complaints procedure.
27. Mr X continued to contact the officer multiple times per day, by email and by telephone requesting call backs.
28. In late July, another officer contacted him by phone as requested. They offered him a carer’s assessment. Mr X declined the Council’s offer and wanted to speak about the matter of incorrect records. The officer told him she was unable to do so. He hung up the phone. He made a formal complaint.
29. In August, the Council wrote to Mr X. It told him that his communication had been unreasonably persistent and detailed a communication plan he should use going forward. It gave him two email addresses to use, one for information and one to discuss his carers assessment. It also gave him information for making a complaint online.
30. In September, Mr X made another formal complaint. He told the Council to communicate with him by telephone only.
31. In October, Mr X emailed the Council. He told the Council his reason for requesting the Council do not communicate him via email or letter was because he often disagreed with the contents written communications from the Council and was unable to discuss the contents with the officer who wrote it. He said receiving letters also caused distress to the person he cared for.
32. In October Mr X withdrew his complaint.
33. In November, the Council offered Mr X an appointment to complete the carer’s assessment. Mr X declined this appointment.

Analysis

Reasonable adjustments (part a of the complaint)

34. Mr X says he repeatedly requested the Council only communicate him via the telephone because he has autism and finds letters and emails from the Council make him anxious.
35. Mr X told the Council he was pursuing a diagnosis for autism in his carer’s assessment in 2023. This was not a request for a reasonable adjustment.
36. The law states organisations have to take steps to remove or prevent obstacles for people accessing their service. Throughout 2024, Mr X regularly contacted the Council by telephone, email and online contact forms. During this time, Mr X expressed a preference for telephone calls. The Council records dated August 2024 demonstrate the Council considered his reasonable adjustment request. It decided it was not a reasonable request as Mr X did not provide a medical reason, other than telling the Council that receiving information about a historical complaint was triggering for him. To manage his communication, the Council instructed its Customer Relations department to file his emails, not write letters and just to listen for new information if he calls. The other Council services continued to email Mr X responding to his emails, and by letter to arrange assessments he requested.
37. Mr X told the Council on his September complaint form he wanted telephone communication only and did not provide a reason for this. In October, Mr X told the Council his reasons for not wanting to receive emails and letters. These reasons were the same as the documented reasons in the August records. I am satisfied the Council were managing Mr X’s persistent correspondence to minimise the repetitive discussions about the historical complaint about incorrect records. I am also satisfied Mr X continued to have access to all services. Therefore, I find no fault with the Council’s decision not to grant Mr X’s reasonable adjustment request.

Carer’s assessment (part c of the complaint)

38. Mr X declined the Council’s offer to complete a carer’s assessment in July and November 2024. He told the Council he would not complete the assessment offered to him in November until the Council deleted previous records he did not agree with. It was Mr X’s choice to decline the offers of assessment. The Council does not have to complete a carer’s assessment in the event the carer refuses to complete the assessment.

Poor communication (part d of the complaint)

39. Mr X says there were multiple occasions where Council officers told him they would call at specific times and did not call. He also complains about the conduct of the officers he spoke to and said they hung up on him. The Council’s case records show throughout 2024 the Council made and accepted multiple calls from Mr X. The records show the repetitive nature of the calls. The records show on occasions when officers terminated the call, they explained their reasons before doing so. The records also detail multiple occasions when Mr X’s conduct was not conducive to a productive conversation, and he also ended calls prematurely.
40. Mr X says the Council banned communication from him which prevented him from accessing services. I am satisfied the Council properly followed its guidance on managing unreasonable customer behaviour and did not prevent him from accessing any services. I find no fault with the Council’s decision-making to manage its resources and managing Mr X’s communication.
41. Mr X considers the letters and emails he received from the Council to amount to harassment. He intermittently blocked his email account from receiving any emails from the Council. In August he told the Council he did not read any emails it sent him because he deletes them immediately. Mr X choosing not to read emails is an obstacle to him properly accessing Council services. However, as I have addressed in the section above, I find no fault with the Council’s decision making regarding its decision not to grant Mr X’s reasonable adjustment and find Mr X’s own actions contributed to the injustice he experienced in relation to poor communication.

Complaint handling (part e of the complaint)

42. Mr X complains the Council refused to complete its complaints process. Mr X made regular complaints about similar matters and during contact with different officers requested to withdraw complaints. I do not find any fault with the Council’s handling of Mr X’s complaints significant enough to make a finding of fault.

Back to top

Decision

43. I find no fault with the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman