Summary: Mrs D complained about the Council’s social care assessment and care planning for her daughter, Miss B. We found delay reviewing Miss B’s care and support needs and delay responding to the complaints which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to make symbolic payments to Miss B and Mrs D to remedy this.

The complaint

1. Mrs D complained about the Council’s social care assessment and care planning for her daughter, Miss B. In particular, she complained the Council:
1. Delayed assessing Miss B’s care and support needs in 2022. As a result, she missed out on an additional 30 hours per week care and support during college holidays.
2. Refused to compensate Miss B for the loss of that additional care and support.
3. Failed to provide occupational therapy and speech and language therapy from July 2023.
4. Failed to provide a suitable placement to meet Miss B’s care and support needs after she left college in July 2023. As a result, Miss B required additional support at home as she was unable to attend the provision that had been secured.
5. Delayed cancelling a taxi in November 2023 resulting in a £360 charge.
6. Delayed reviewing Miss B’s care and support needs after she stopped attending a provision in November 2023 and did not put any other provision in place.
7. Delayed refunding the cost of a taxi on 26 April 2024.
8. Delayed responding to her request for re-assessment of Miss B’s care and support needs to consider a placement offer at a provision in April 2024.
9. Reduced Miss B’s care and support without explanation in June 2024 and the care and support plan contained errors and was not realistic.
10. Refused to fund transport to provision from September 2024.
11. Failed to communicate or respond to her complaints.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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)
4. 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.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have investigated

7. A number of Mrs D’s complaints are about events that happened more than twelve months before she came to the Ombudsman. In line with paragraph 5, I have exercised discretion to investigate. This is because the Council’s complaint responses were delayed, so Mrs D had a good reason for not coming to us sooner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Care and support

10. The Care Act 2014 requires local authorities to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. The assessment determines what the person's needs are and whether the person has any needs which are eligible for support from the council.
11. Where councils have determined that a person has any eligible needs, they must meet those needs. The person's needs and how they will be met must be set out in a care and support plan.
12. Councils should keep care and support plans under review, at least every 12 months. They should carry out reviews as quickly as is reasonably practicable in a timely manner proportionate to the needs to be met. Councils must also conduct a review if an adult or a person acting on the adult’s behalf makes a reasonable request for one.

Direct payments

13. Everyone whose needs the local authority meets must receive a personal budget as part of the care and support plan. A personal budget sets out the cost of meeting eligible needs, the amount a person must contribute to that cost and the amount the council must contribute. A personal budget can be administered as direct payments to enable people to commission their own care and support.
14. Direct payments cannot be used to employ a close relative living with the service user unless the local authority agrees it is necessary to meet the person’s needs (e.g., if no other carer is available or to avoid severe distress).

My findings

15. I have set out my findings and the key events for each part of Mrs D’s complaint. This is not meant to describe everything that happened.

Background

16. Miss B has learning difficulties, autism and care and support needs. She lives with her mother, Mrs D and sibling, Miss J. Miss B receives direct payments to employ Mrs D and Miss J as personal assistants. Miss B attended college until July 2023. At that point her education, health and care plan ceased as she was 25 years old.

(a) & (b) Delayed assessing Miss B’s care and support needs in 2022. As a result, she missed out on an additional 30 hours per week care and support during college holidays. The Council then refused to compensate Miss B for the loss of that additional care and support.

17. In May 2022, Mrs D wrote to the Council requesting an increase in the number of hours per week that she and Miss J were acting as personal assistants. This was discussed at a monthly recview meeting on 1 August. The Council said it would review Miss B’s needs to see if more support was required during the summer holiday.
18. The assessment was carried out on 8 September. It found that Miss B needed help with cooking, accessing the community (including transport), and managing her home. Mrs D and Miss J acted as personal assistants for 19 hours per week. Miss B wanted to also use a friend as a personal assistant.
19. Discussions followed about transport to college as Mrs D had said she could no longer drive Miss B. We have investigated a separate complaint about this (our ref: 24011493).
20. In December 2022, the Council issued a new care and support plan. This said Miss B would receive direct payments to employ Mrs D and Miss J as personal assistants for 19 hours per week, to support her with daily living and access to the community and social opportunities. The Council had also agreed to fund transport to college until July 2023, which was 40 hours per week.
21. On 19 November 2023, Mrs D complained to the Council that the care and support review had been delayed; she had requested it in May 2022 but it had not been done until September 2022.
22. The Council responded to the complaint on 13 March 2024. It accepted there had been a delay. It apologised and made payments totalling £800 to Miss B and Mrs D to remedy the distress caused by this and other issues. This is a suitable remedy for any distress caused by the delay, in line with our guidance on remedies.
23. The Council’s investigating officer had said that as a result of the delay, Miss B had had no support for the college breaks in summer, October and December 2022. In May 2023, the Council had agreed to an additional 30 hours per week of one-to-one personal assistant support. The investigating officer therefore recommended that the direct payments for this additional support be backdated to summer 2022. A further response by the Council on 26 February 2025 said it did not accept the investigating officer’s recommendation.
24. Miss B requested an assessment of her care and support needs in May 2022, but the Council did not complete it until September 2022. This delay caused her uncertainty and distress. However, the September 2022 review and the December 2022 care and support plan did not identify a need for additional holiday support. Although extra support was later agreed following the May 2023 review, I cannot conclude, even on balance of probabilities, that Miss B would have been assessed as needing an extra 30 hours per week had the assessment taken place in June 2022.
25. The Council has already made a payment in March 2024 to remedy the distress caused by the delay. As the evidence does not show Miss B would have received extra support earlier, I am satisfied that no further injustice resulted from the delay. I therefore make no further recommendations.

(c) Failed to provide occupational therapy and speech and language therapy from July 2023.

26. Miss B was receiving speech and language therapy (SALT) and occupational therapy (OT) as part of her education, health and care plan. Mrs D complained on 6 June 2024 that it had not continued after the EHC plan ceased in July 2023. The Council responded on 17 June 2025, it did not uphold the complaint.
27. There was no fault. The Council is not responsible for providing SALT and OT, it is NHS provision. Once the education, health and care plan ceased, Miss B would need to ask her GP to make a referral to continue with it. The care and support assessments of May 2023 and September 2023 did not identify SALT or OT as a care and support need so there was no role for the Council.

(d) Failed to provide a suitable placement to meet Miss B’s care and support needs after she left college in July 2023. As a result, Miss B required additional support at home as she was unable to attend the provision that had been secured.

28. Before Miss B left college in July 2023, she had told the Council she wished to attend two music and drama provisions that were out of area, which I will call Academy 1 and Academy 2.
29. The Council assessed Miss B’s care and support needs in May 2023. It said Miss B required one-to-one personal assistant support for in total 48 hours per week in term time and 52 hours per week during college holidays. This was to support Miss B with activities at home and in the community. It also provided funding for petrol costs.
30. On 20 July 2023, the Council agreed to fund the provision at Academy 1 and Academy 2, both for one day a week, including transport by taxi from September 2023. In November 2023, Miss B decided to stop attending Academy 2.
31. Mrs D complained on 6 June 2024 that no suitable support had been put in place after July 2023. The Council responded on 17 June 2025, it upheld a complaint about a delay in assessing Miss B, which I deal with in paragraphs 37-39 below.
32. I do not find fault. Miss B decided Academy 2 did not meet her needs after attending for a few months. But there is no evidence that the Council or Miss B considered it would not be suitable when it agreed to fund that provision. In addition, the Council funded Miss B’s attendance at Academy 1 from September 2023. So there is evidence it considered how to support Miss B after she left college. There was no fault.

(e) Delayed cancelling a taxi in November 2023 resulting in a £360 charge.

33. When Miss B decided she no longer wished to attend Academy 2, she wanted to cancel the taxi that was booked for this. Mrs D called the Council on 21 November 2023 to advise that Miss B would not be attending Academy 2 on 23 November.
34. The Council spoke to the taxi company on 22 November. It said it required 48 hours’ notice to cancel the booking. The £360 fee could therefore not be refunded.
35. Mrs D complained on 2 April 2024. She said the direct payment could have been used for something else if the Council had not delayed speaking to the taxi company. The Council responded on 17 June 2025, it did not uphold the complaint. It said the taxi firm would have required notice prior to 21 November, when Mrs D contacted the Council. In addition, Miss B received direct payments to fund the taxi and on 1 August 2023, the Council had advised Mrs D to liaise directly with taxi company.
36. There was no fault. Mrs D asked the Council to cancel the taxi after the notice period. The lack of a refund was therefore not caused by fault by the Council.

(f) Delayed reviewing Miss B’s care and support needs after she stopped attending a provision in November 2023 and did not put any other provision in place.

37. After Miss B stopped attending Academy 2 in November 2023, Mrs D requested a review of her care and support needs. This was done on 19 June 2024. Mrs D complained about this delay on 27 August 2024. The Council responded on 17 June 2025. It accepted there had been a delay in reviewing Miss B’s needs and offered a payment of £100 to Miss B to remedy the distress caused by this.
38. After she stopped attending Academy 2, Miss B remained in receipt of direct payments for personal assistant support but her circumstances had changed. There should therefore have been a review of her care and support needs to determine if she required more support. I appreciate that Mrs D says it was clear she did, as Miss B was now at home for one day a week more, but I cannot say, even on balance of probabilities, what the findings of a care review in December 2023 would have been and whether Miss B would have received additional care and support. The delay therefore causes distress and uncertainty about whether the care and support in place fully met her needs. This is an injustice to Miss B.
39. Our guidance on remedies says that a moderate, symbolic payment may be appropriate to remedy uncertainty caused by fault. I am satisfied that the £100 already offered by the Council to Miss B is in line with our guidance and is a suitable remedy for this injustice.

(g) Delayed refunding the cost of a taxi on 26 April 2024.

40. In April 2024, Miss B was using direct payments to fund a taxi to Academy 1. The Council’s case records show there was a dispute with the taxi driver about where the taxi was waiting and the collection time. The Council spoke to Mrs D, Miss B and the taxi company about the arrangements, but due to the disagreement Miss B wanted to use a different taxi driver on 26 April. This was not possible to arrange at short notice. Miss B therefore refused to use the taxi.
41. The Council agreed to reimburse Miss B the £460 cost but was then advised by the taxi firm that there was a four-week cancellation notice period. The Council could therefore not issue a refund as it could not reclaim this from the taxi company.
42. Mrs D complained on 6 June 2024 that the money had not been refunded. The Council responded on 26 February 2025 and said it would refund the taxi fare. Mrs D complained to the Ombudsman about a delay in refunding the money.
43. I do not find fault. Miss B’s refusal to use the taxi was not caused by fault by the Council and no refund could be issued to Miss B due to the taxi company’s policies. It was not fault for the Council not to pay Miss B a refund. I therefore do not find fault in the Council issuing a refund 10 months later.

(h) Delayed responding to her request for re-assessment of Miss B’s care and support needs to consider a placement offer at Academy 1 in April 2024.

44. On 29 April 2024, Mrs D asked the Council to review Miss B’s needs and determine if it would fund her attendance at Academy 1 two days a week from September 2024.
45. Following the Council’s assessment of 19 June 2024, it told Mrs D on 9 August that the Council would not fund the taxi transport to Academy 1.
46. Mrs D had complained on 6 June 2024 about a delay in informing them of the transport decision. The Council responded on 5 November 2024. It apologised there had been some delay and that it had not sent a formal letter confirming the outcome of the care and support assessment, but did not consider this had affected Miss B.
47. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance says that an assessment should be carried out over an appropriate and reasonable timescale, taking into account the urgency of needs and considering any fluctuation in them. We expect councils to complete assessments in a timescale that is proportionate to the complexity of the issues, and normally within about six weeks. There was no delay in reassessing Miss B, therefore, as it was completed in June 2024. There was some delay informing Miss B of the outcome and of the Councils’ decision about transport, but this did not cause any injustice to Miss B as the Council declined to fund transport to Academy 1. She therefore did not miss out on any provision due to the delay.

(i) Reduced Miss B’s care and support without explanation in June 2024 and the care and support plan contained errors and was not realistic.

48. Following the May 2023 care and support review, the Council was providing Miss B with direct payments to fund one-to-one personal assistant support for 48 hours per week in term time and 52 hours per week during holidays.
49. Following the June 2024 care and support re-assessment, the plan was for 30.25 hours per week. Mrs D complained on 27 August 2024 about the care and support plan. The Council responded on 5 November 2024.
50. It is not the Ombudsman's role to decide what, if any, care and support a person needs. That is the Council's role. My role is to consider if the council has followed the correct process for establishing a person's needs and if it acted correctly when this process was complete. In doing so we look at what information the council considered, and if it took account of the service user’s and carer’s wishes. If a council considers all this information properly the Ombudsman cannot find a council at fault just because a service user disagrees with its decision, or outcome of an assessment.
51. The June 2024 care and support assessment sets out Miss B’s needs and how these may be met. The assessor considered Miss B’s and Mrs D’s views. I appreciate Mrs D and Miss B do not consider the support hours are sufficient, but there was no fault in the way the assessment was done. I therefore cannot find fault in the outcome.

(j) Refused to fund transport to Academy 1 provision from September 2024.

52. Mrs D complained on 27 August 2024 about the Council’s refusal to fund transport to Academy 1 two days a week from September 2024. The Council responded on 5 November 2024. It said it had decided funding transport was not proportionate, as there were other local services Miss B could access to meet her needs, which would use fewer public resources.
53. It is not the Ombudsman's role to decide what, if any, care and support a person needs. That is the council's role. My role is to consider if the council has followed the correct process for establishing a person's needs and if it acted correctly when this process was complete. In doing so we look at what information the council considered, and if it took account of the service user’s and carer’s wishes. If a council considers all this information properly we cannot find a council at fault just because a service user disagrees with its decision, or outcome of an assessment.
54. Following the June 2024 care and support assessment, the Council decided not to fund transport to Academy 1. The Care and Support Statutory guidance says in deciding how to meet a person’s care and support needs, the Council may take into consideration its own finances and budgetary position and that it must ensure its funding is sufficient to meet the needs of the entire local population. The Council considered Miss B’s care and support assessment and decided it was not proportionate to fund transport. This was a decision it was entitled to make and there was no fault in the way it reached this decision. I therefore cannot find fault in the outcome.

(k) Failed to communicate or respond to her complaints.

55. The Council delayed responding to Mrs D’s complaints, as detailed throughout this statement. Mrs D made numerous complaints, some of which were overlapping, so I accept it was complex for the Council to manage them. Nonetheless, its complaint policy aims to respond within four weeks, so the delay was fault which caused her time and trouble, which is an injustice.

Summary of findings

56. In summary, I found the following fault:
• Delay assessing Miss B’s care and support needs in 2022 caused distress and uncertainty. The Council’s payments of £800 in March 2024 have already remedied this injustice. (complaints a and b)
• Delay reviewing Miss B’s care and support needs after she stopped attending a provision in November 2023. This caused uncertainty about what provision may have been made. The Council’s offer of 17 June 2025 to make a payment of £100 to Miss B is a suitable and proportionate remedy for the injustice. (complaint f)
• Delay advising Miss B of its decision not to fund transport to Academy 1. This did not cause Miss B any injustice. (complaint h)
• Delay responding to Mrs D’s complaints which caused her time and trouble. (complaint k)
57. I have not found fault in the other parts of the complaint.

Back to top

Action

58. Within a month of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• If not already paid, pay Miss B £100 to remedy the distress and uncertainty caused by delay in reviewing her care and support needs after she stopped attending a provision in November 2023.
• Pay Mrs D £250 to remedy the time and trouble caused by delay in complaint handling.
59. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

60. There was fault by the Council. The actions the Council has agreed to take remedy the injustice caused. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman