Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has not dealt properly with Mr Y’s adult social care, resulting in his needs not being met and causing distress. The Council is at fault because it did not take action to reduce identified risks as part of Mr Y’s Care and Support plan before reducing his care provision. Mr Y suffered the risk of harm. The Council should apologise, pay Mr Y £250 and review Mr Y’s case.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complains on behalf of Mr Y that the Council failed to deal with his care needs assessment properly because it:
• reduced support from 88 hrs to 14 hrs per week and refused to meet assessed needs from October 2024.
• withdrew support before safety measures were put in place.
2. Mrs X says Mr Y’s care needs are not being met, he has been placed at risk of harm as a result of changes being made without risk reduction measures in place, and they have suffered avoidable distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
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

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have investigated that part of Mr X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with his care. The final section of this statement contains my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.
8. I have not investigated any reference to a previous dispute between Mr X and the Council because this did not form part of Mr X’s original complaint and the Council has not had an opportunity to consider it.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law, guidance and policies

Assessment

11. 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.
12. 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.

Care Plan

13. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). The care and support plan should consider what needs the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area. When preparing a care and support plan the council must involve any carer the adult has. The support plan must include a personal budget, which is the money the council has worked out it will cost to arrange the necessary care and support for that person.

What happened?

14. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
15. Mr Y has eligible care and support needs arising from surgery when he was younger. The Council completed a re-assessment of his needs in September 2024.
16. The re-assessment identified that Mr Y’s needs were at a reduced level.
17. In October 2024, the Council wrote to Mr Y telling him that it would be terminating his package of care and the Council would look for an alternative provider.
18. The Care assessment outcome was completed in early November 2024. The Council emailed Mrs X outlining a six week transition period to the new care and support arrangements.
19. Mrs X complained to the Council on behalf of Mr Y. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint and did not uphold it.
20. Mrs X escalated her complaint to stage 2 of the Council’s complaints process saying she disagreed with the reduction in support and believed it was financially driven.
21. The Council did not uphold Mrs X’s complaint.
22. Mrs X engaged solicitors and her MP who corresponded with the Council about Mr Y’s care and support provision.
23. Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman in January 2025.
24. After requests from Mrs X, the Council completed a mental capacity assessment for Mr Y in March 2025 which found he had capacity to understand his care.

Analysis

Reduction in support

25. I have seen the Care and Support Assessment that was undertaken in September 2024.
26. I have seen a letter to Mr Y saying the Council was giving notice to terminate the package of care it was providing because “it was no longer viable.”
27. Mrs X asked the Council why the care package was no longer viable. It replied that care had been provided through staff working overtime and this was more expensive than care being delivered through a different provider.
28. The Council says there are two separate services involved, the operational team who assessed Mr Y and the service provider. These are two separate parts of the Council that operate independently. I agree with the Council.
29. While the reassessment and the provider service giving notice are close in time to one another, there is no evidence that the reduction in Mr Y’s care package as set out in the Care and Support Assessment was caused as a result of the provider service’s decision to stop providing care to Mr Y.
30. Mrs X disagrees with the decision to reduce Mr Y’s package of care. However, this is not fault by the Council.

Withdrawal of support

31. Following Mrs X’s complaint, the Council postponed the transition period into the new care and support arrangements until December 2024.
32. The Care Assessment says:
• [Mr Y] has CCTV in the home, [Mr Y’s] Parents are able to access this to check who is coming to the door. This is to support [Mr Y] to be safe at home, and for him to be able to see who is at the door. [Mr Y] stated within the assessment that he is happy with this arrangement and that he does not open the door for people that he does not know.
• [Mr Y ] has been working with SLS support workers over the last year to understand what to do in an emergency. [Mr Y] was able to explain during the assessment, what he would do in an emergency for example when asked what he do if he could smell smoke, he said that he leave the house and call 999. Then I asked him to show me how he would call 999, [Mr Y] was able to show me on his phone how he would call 999, he then said that he would ask for the fire bridge. I then asked [Mr Y] what address would you give, he was able to reply with [his address]. [Mr Y] was unable to give his door number correctly even when he checked the door.
• [Mr Y’s] parents report that they feel [Mr Y] is not able to summons for help independently. However, SLS staff have been supporting him through repetition to develop the skills needed to summons for help, particularly how to respond to a fire. Given this discrepancy, a referral to Occupational Health, CHNS has been made to explore [Mr Y’s] safety within the home (calling for help in an emergency, reporting repairs, using kitchen facilities safely etc. The referral has also requested to explore [Mr Y’s] safety when in the community, for example road safety, using public transport etc to highlight any further needs or risks.
33. An Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment was recommended and undertaken in November 2024. I have seen a record of this assessment which identified that Mr Y faced:
• extreme risk in relation to fire safety.
• high risk in relation to road awareness.
• Medium risks in relation to strangers knocking on the door and shopping.
34. The Council says that it took action listed in the Care and Support Plan and in addition took the following action:
• “A telecare alarm system was introduced on 16th December 2024 – this was a smoke alarm system attached to a call box which verbally prompts Mr Y to leave the house.
• A referral was made to Avon Fire Services on in December 2024 to complete a household fire check. No concerns were raised.
• A tracker has also been placed on Mr Y’s property meaning that if Blue Light Services were to be called, Mr Y would be identified as a vulnerable adult. “
35. The Care and Support Plan provided by the Council identifies areas where Mr Y will require assistance including cooking hot meals without support, doing laundry, routine for securing his home, travel training, and support to keep his home habitable and maintained.
36. Despite being asked to do so, the Council has not provided the Ombudsman with any evidence to show all the transition or risk mitigation arrangements listed in the Care and Support Plan were actually made.
37. I have seen evidence that the Council addressed the fire safety risk through the measures in paragraph 33 above.
38. On the balance of probabilities, the Council did not properly address other risks identified in the Care and Support Plan and the OT assessment before beginning to reduce Mr Y’s care. This is fault by the Council. Mr Y suffered a risk of harm. There is no evidence to show Mr Y suffered any actual harm as a result.

Back to top

Action

39. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of this decision:
• Apologise to Mr Y for the fault found. 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 Y £250 as a symbolic payment to reflect the risk of harm he was exposed to.
• Review Mr Y's case and ensure all the support listed in his Care and Support Plan is being delivered.
40. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

41. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman