Summary: Ms X complains the Council’s Adult Social Care services failed in its duty of care despite a safeguarding concern and adult needs assessment to help her in a dispute with her housing provider. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters. So, we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council’s Adult Social Care Service has failed to implement its duty of care and support her in a dispute with her housing provider. Ms X says the matter has caused her significant distress and financial loss, and she has been displaced from her home. Ms X wants the Council to adhere to its duty of care, apologise and provide her with support to resolve her housing issues.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
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(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Ms 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

Safeguarding

6. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect. An enquiry could range from a conversation with the person who is the subject of the concern, to a more formal multi-agency arrangement. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse. (section 42, Care Act 2014)

What happened

7. What follows is summary of key events. It does not include all the information I reviewed as part of my investigation.
8. Ms X rented a property from a housing association I will refer to as Association B. Ms X referred herself to the Council’s Adult Social Care services in September 2024 for an adult needs assessment. This was due to issues at the property she reported were affecting her health. Ms X temporarily moved out of the property while Association B investigated the issues and carried out repairs. Ms X then moved into other accommodation out of the Council’s area she was funding herself.
9. The Council recorded the referral as a section 42(1) enquiry (safeguarding) under the Care Act 2014 to carry out an investigation to establish whether abuse or neglect had occurred. The Council would hold a section 42 (2) investigation if it considered the enquiry was substantiated
10. The Council triaged and assessed the risk and urgency of Ms X’s referral. But did not consider it should be classed as urgent because Ms X had already moved out of her property reducing the immediate risk to her. However, the Council allocated the case to a social worker I will refer to as Officer C, to carry out the adult needs assessment and review the safeguarding concerns.
11. Officer C contacted Ms X a few days after the referral to arrange a visit. Officer C advised Ms X adult social care were not responsible for diagnosing or managing serious health conditions which would be for a GP or other relevant professional. Ms X confirmed she had support from a housing charity and Citizens Advice Bureau. Her GP had written to Association B asking it to resolve matters urgently. Ms X had also complained to the Housing Ombudsman and to the Council’s Housing Standards service. Ms X explained the impact of issues at the property on to her health needs and the distress and anxiety caused by the temporary move.
12. Officer C visited Ms X at her temporary accommodation in September 2024 to start the needs assessment. The Council confirms the assessment focused on Ms X’s ability to manage daily tasks. Ms X could wash, dress and mobilise independently. Ms X said she could prepare meals though was finding it difficult due to her usual appliances and equipment remaining at her property.
13. The officer said they would contact Ms X’s GP for information, follow up matters with the housing team and consider referring Ms X to the mental health reablement service. Officer C sought information for the needs assessment.
14. Officer C completed the needs assessment in November 2024 and contacted Ms X to meet and finalise it. The assessment noted Ms X’s concerns, health issues and wish to return to her property. Officer C considered Ms X:
• Had the appropriate services involved to support her in the housing dispute with Association B.
• Was staying in alternative accommodation so for safeguarding purposes had removed herself from the alleged hazards at the property.
• Was receiving support from her GP for her health.
• Was considered competent to make decisions for herself so needed no adult social care involvement with decision making.
• Could be referred to mental health services if required.
• Did not meet the Care Act eligibility for support from the Council as she was able to manage her own needs.
15. Officer C told Ms X the Council would not be progressing the safeguarding enquiry to a full investigation. This was due to removing herself from the property and working with the housing teams about the property. Ms X did not agree with the outcome. Ms X said Association B was refusing to repair the property and forcing her into a property transfer. Ms X raised concerns she was paying for the alternative accommodation and her rent.
16. Officer C contacted Association B about Ms X’s concerns and arranged a meeting with the Association, housing standards and the housing charity in October 2024. This was to consider the history of professional involvement; an update and outcomes Ms X was seeking. The social worker put forward Ms X’s concerns including the costs for the temporary accommodation. Association B explained the actions they were taking, reasons for decisions and agreement to look at refunding Ms X’s accommodation costs. Housing standards explained the visits made to Ms X’s property and actions taken. Officer C said Adult Social Care were limited in their capacity and remit to negotiate any repairs that would enable Ms X to return to her property.
17. The housing charity noted their aim was to try and help Ms X keep her home. But this was dependent on Association B. And all they could do was to negotiate with them as it was an independent housing organisation. Ms X’s GP had also stated the property was affecting Ms X’s health. The notes of the meeting show the social worker “concluded by stating there is nothing else that can be done from a safeguarding perspective and (if) everyone is doing their best and trying to meet her needs there is nothing further that can be done from social services”.
18. The officer contacted Ms X to finalise the assessment. Ms X declined as she had moved out of the Council’s area and could not go to the Council offices. Ms X asked Officer C to complete the assessment over a video call, but Ms X could not join the call. Officer C offered to complete the assessment by telephone. Ms X declined to approve and finalise the assessment alleging she was at risk of neglect by Association B so considered the Council had a duty of care towards her.
19. The Council says Ms X had moved outside the Council’s area. So, it considered further support from Adult Social Care, including advocacy services and the mental health reablement team was no longer appropriate.
20. Officer C completed the safeguarding enquiry. It noted information from Ms X, her concerns about her property, the temporary move and health issues. The enquiry referred to Officer C’s home visit to see Ms X and the support she had in place. The officer concluded it was not a safeguarding concern. This was because Ms X had safeguarded herself by moving from the property and harm to her health she considered came from conditions at the property.
21. Officer C considered Ms X did not:
• Meet the need for care and support from the Council. This was because she was not presenting with care and support needs requiring intervention from the Council. Any medical needs were being assessed by Ms X’s GP.
• Was not experiencing or was at risk of abuse or neglect. This was because Association B had rehoused Ms X while it carried out repairs to the property. So, there was no evidence to suggest Association B had intentionally caused neglect or committed acts of omission. Ms X remained in other accommodation at the assessment and was no longer living in the Council’s area.
• Ms X could protect herself against the abuse or neglect or risk of it. This was because Ms X had gained appropriate professional support from other organisations to pursue the disrepair complaint. And Association B had carried out works to resolve some issues at the property.
22. Ms X considers the social worker failed to carry out a needs assessment as they did not stay long at the property and failed to look at the evidence she provided. Ms X considers the social worker failed to recognise she was in pain due to her health needs and request information from her GP. In addition, Ms X says the social worker failed to advocate on her behalf at meetings. And failed in their safeguarding duties by not assessing whether the alternative properties offered by Association B met Ms X’s needs despite being unsuitable.
23. The Council confirms Officer C obtained information as part of the safeguarding concern to use in the adult needs assessment. The officer visited Ms X at the property to understand Ms X’s care needs better. The officer also had information from Ms X’s emails about the issues with her property, sought information from Ms X’s GP and had access to health needs records. Officer C sent the needs assessment to Ms X to amend or update but Ms X declined to do so.
24. The Council confirms that Officer C had explained to Ms X they could not influence housing options or decisions so were limited in how it could assist her. However, the officer arranged a professionals meeting and explained the outcomes Ms X was seeking. Officer C advocated for Ms X and considered it unfair she was funding her temporary accommodation and should be reimbursed by Association B.
25. The Council says Ms X should be discussing any pain issues with her GP as the social worker was not a health professional. In addition, the social worker could not say whether a property offered to Ms X was suitable or not as it was not their role. The Council considered Ms X could accept or declining a property had capacity and could make these decisions herself.

My assessment

26. The documents provided shows the Council responded to Ms X’s referral and arranged for a social worker to carry out a safeguarding concern and a needs assessment. Although the Council did not consider Ms X a high priority as she had moved herself away from the risk the social worker contacted her soon after the referral. The social worker started a safeguarding enquiry and a needs assessment.
27. The evidence provided shows the Council considered the requirements of the Care Act when assessing safeguarding enquiry which was the remit of the Adult Social Care service in this case. This was to consider whether it needed to carry out a safeguarding investigation and to assess if Ms X had any eligible care needs. The Council’s adult social care service was unable to assist with alternative accommodation or repairs to her existing property. The Council gathered information from Ms X and held a professionals’ meeting to establish the actions taken by Association B and Council services.
28. The evidence provided shows the Council considered the requirements of s42 and did not consider Ms X met those requirements as outlined in paragraph 21. Ms X disagrees with the outcome of the safeguarding enquiry. But it is a decision made by officers using their professional judgement. We cannot question the merits of the decision itself without evidence of fault in the way it was made. I do not consider there is fault in this case.
29. This is because the evidence shows the Council considered information provided, met with Ms X, held meetings and carried out a needs assessment when reaching its decision. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council carried out the safeguarding enquiry.
30. The documents show the Council carried out a needs assessment, started in September 2024 and completed in November 2024. Ms X considers there were delays by the Council. The Care Act requires councils to carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. The Council triaged and assessed the needs assessment when receiving the referral. The Council did not consider it was urgent as Ms X had removed herself from the risk. The documents show the social worker was gathering information and visited Ms X. The officer also held a professionals meeting before completing the assessment. I do not consider there were any significant delays by Council in completing the assessment due to the information it needed to collect.
31. Ms X disagrees with outcome of the needs assessment. But again, the decision was a matter of officer’s professional judgement. There is no evidence of fault in way the decision was made that Ms X did have any eligible care needs. This is because the evidence shows the Council followed the requirements of the care act and sought information from Ms X, health professionals and others before a reaching the decision.

Back to top

Decision

32. I find no fault by the Council in the way it dealt with a safeguarding concern and adult needs assessment for Ms X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman