Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the outcome of the Council’s care needs assessment. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council completed its assessment to justify our involvement. In any event, the Council is currently completing a review of that assessment. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the outcome of the Council’s care needs assessment. He disagrees with the Council’s decision he does not need support. He said the Council was discriminating against him. He wants it to review its decision.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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. Following a request for support, the Council referred Mr X for an Occupational Therapy (OT) assessment and to its reablement support service to assess his eligible care needs. The reablement service:
• met with Mr X to discuss his support needs,
• suggested equipment he could use to support independence, and
• provided a reablement support work to visit Mr X daily to assess the amount of support he needed.
6. Following a period of assessment, the reablement service said Mr X did not require support. That was because the only support it had provided was around meal preparation. It made suggestions to Mr X about equipment he could use to support independence in this area.
7. Mr X complained. He said the Council had discriminated against him. He said he needed support and was unhappy with the equipment suggested.
8. The Council agreed to complete a further assessment. That assessment came to the same outcome as the first, prompting Mr X to complaint again. The Council has confirmed in response to this complaint, it agreed to complete a further assessment with an OT and Practice Consultant. It is still in the process of finalising that assessment.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council. Although he disagreed with the outcome of the initial assessment, there is no evidence of fault in how the Council completed that. It met with him, considered his views, and provided support to assess his level of need. It also made recommendations for equipment to support him in daily tasks. In addition, the Council has agreed to complete a further review and this is currently ongoing. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
10. Mr X states the Council has discriminated against him. That is not a finding the Ombudsman can make, only the courts. However, there is nothing to suggest the Council has not had due regard for its Public Sector Equality Duty in its provision of services to Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council is currently completing a care assessment review. Therefore, further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman