Summary: Mrs X complained the Council removed her care and support after completing a care reassessment using a non -specialist deafblind assessor. She said the Council has placed her back on a previous care assessment, which does not meet her needs. The Council is at fault for delaying in reassessing Mrs X care needs using a specialist deafblind assessor causing distress and uncertainty. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X, complete a full reassessment of her care needs, review its care assessment policy relating to deafblind assessments, ensuring staff understanding and make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council removed her care and support after completing a care reassessment using a non- specialist deafblind assessor. She said it has placed her on an out-of-date package of care that does not meet her needs.
2. She said the delays in carrying out the care assessment have left her isolated from the community, causing distress, uncertainty and frustration.

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 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)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate
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)
7. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Care Quality Commission (CQC)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have investigated matters from January 2024 when Mrs X’s care reassessment was completed to April 2025 and her complaint to the Ombudsman.
9. 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). Some of Mrs X’s complaints refer to care reviews, or lack of them going back to 2019. I have not investigated matters before January 2024, these are considered late and it was reasonable for Mrs X to have complained to us about these earlier.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Mrs X and 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

Relevant law and guidance

Care Assessment

12. 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.
13. Section 27 of the Care Act 2014 says councils should keep care and support plans under review. Government Care and Support Statutory Guidance says councils should review plans at least every 12 months. Councils should consider a light touch review six to eight weeks after agreeing and signing off the plan and personal budget. 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.

Deafblind care assessment

14. A care assessment which relates to an individual who is deafblind must be carried out by a person who has specific training and expertise relating to individuals who are deafblind. (The Care and Support (Assessment) Regulations 2014, section 6(1); Care and Support for Deafblind Children and Adults Policy Guidance 2014, Para 26.

The Councils Complaint and Feedback Policy Appendix 2 – Social Care Services Feedback procedure

15. Receipt of complaints will be acknowledged no later than three working days after the date received.
16. Most complaints should be completed within six weeks, although to statutory timescale is six months. Timescale commences at the point the wording of the complaint is agreed, either in writing or verbally, with the customer.
17. A report is produced for each complaint investigation, presented at an adjudication meeting and then sent to the complainant along with a letter from the adjudicating officer and a covering letter.

What happened

18. Mrs X is registered deafblind. From 2019 she had a care package of support on which she received direct payments, including funding for taxi fares. From 2020 she also received payment for a cleaner for one hour a week.
19. The Council carried out ad-hoc reviews of Mrs X’s care between 2019 and 2024 and it remained the same. It reviewed Mrs X’s care again in January 2024. Following this in April 2024 the Council told her she was no longer eligible for support. The Council closed Mrs X’s direct payment account advising she needed to meet her own needs, including the use of public transport through her employment income.
20. In July 2024, Mrs X complained to the Council, she said it had failed to complete a proper assessment of her adult social care needs using a qualified deafblind assessor and had wrongly removed her direct payments causing a loss of independence and distress.
21. In October 2024 the Council provided a complaint response with recommendations. It upheld Mrs X’s complaint, including:
• it had failed to tell Mrs X the assessment in January 2024, was a reassessment of need and not a full assessment;
• it said past reviews were either poorly written and not shared with Mrs X and some were not carried out at all.
• it had failed, in accordance with statutory guidance, to complete assessments using a specialist assessor for deafblind and had not considered the importance of human contact.
• it had failed to correctly review and consider Mrs X’s husbands availability and needs as her carer;
• it had failed to properly consider her ability to use buses;
• it had failed to provide Mrs X with right of appeal to its decision to stop her care in April 2024; and
• the faults had caused Mrs X significant distress, time and trouble for which it should apologise.
22. The Council proposed actions to complete within a month which included:
• provide a further apology to Mrs X for reviews not being completed annually;
• undertake a new assessment, carried out by a suitably qualified deafblind assessor and if found to have eligible needs for taxi fares, consider backdating direct payments for this; and
• senior managers and principal social workers to discuss the social teams and occupational therapy’s understanding of specialist deafblind guidance and its application in future Care Act assessments.
23. It proposed further actions to be completed within two months:
• further assessment by the sensory team of Mrs X’s ability to use bus transport; and
• for a financial assessment to be completed should she be unable to safely use bus transport.
24. The Council also backdated her cleaning costs. It also offered a financial remedy of £800 to Mrs X, which she declined.
25. In December 2024, the Council advised Mrs X that it was in the process of reinstating her direct payments as per her care assessment from 2019. It had requested that the community well-being team conduct a new assessment of her care needs with a specialist deafblind assessor.
26. Mrs X remained unhappy with the Councils actions and asked the Ombudsman to investigate. She said;
• in January 2025 the Council reinstated her 2019 taxi provision but it had still not completed an updated full care assessment using a specialist deafblind assessor;
• the Council began an assessment in December 2024, however this was not the full reassessment she was expecting from the Council’s investigation findings and actions. She has not received any further communication from the Council since March 2025; and
• the lack of a new full assessment continues to cause her distress, uncertainty and frustration. She feels isolated from the community as she is concerned the Council will remove her 2019 care assessed taxi payments again.

The Council’s response to the Ombudsman in April 2025

27. The Council said it had completed the following actions:
• a specialist worker from within the disability resource team (DRT) had been working with Mrs X and providing ongoing support;
• possible assessment for formal care and support may be required which takes place after the DRT pathway has been completed;
• a cane assessment has now taken place, this was delayed due to Mrs X’s hesitation using public transport.
• the well-being team had been asked to pause work while the cane assessment was completed;
• the DRT work was nearly completed and Mrs X would be contacted to arrange a full care assessment;

Analysis

Failure to carry out a new care assessment

28. In November 2024 the Council actioned a new care assessment be completed for Mrs X by a specialist deafblind assessor within one month. At time of investigation the assessment remains outstanding. The delay in completing Mrs X’s care assessment with a deafblind specialist assessor as agreed is fault.

Care Assessment

29. Mrs X’s direct payments for taxi’s were removed in April 2024 after assessment by a non-specialist deafblind assessor. These was not reinstated until January 2025, a period of 8 months. This is fault and prevented Mrs X from accessing the community as much as she wanted to, causing distress and uncertainty.
30. Mrs X remains in receipt of direct payments for taxi’s based on an out-of-date care assessment from 2019. Whilst I cannot say whether Mrs X should receive additional care and support until a new assessment is completed, it leaves uncertainty around whether the current care and support in place fully meets her needs.

The Council’s other proposed actions

31. The Councils proposed actions were reasonable however I have not seen any evidence to show that senior managers and principal social workers have met to ensure their teams understanding of specialist deafblind guidance, including correct use of terminology and its application to future care assessments.

Back to top

Action

32. To remedy the injustice the Council caused to Mrs X due to the faults identified, within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to:
1. apologise in writing to Mrs X to acknowledge the injustice caused by the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisation should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings;
2. carry out a new full care assessment with Mrs X with a suitably qualified deafblind assessor as previously agreed;
3. pay Mrs X the £800 already offered to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused by the delayed assessment of care needs by a specialist deafblind assessor;
4. through staff meetings or other appropriate methods, ensure relevant teams within the Council have an understanding of specialist deafblind guidance, including the use if correct terminology for future Care Act 2014 assessments; and

e) review relevant care assessment policy to ensure correct use of deafblind guidance in future Care Act 2014 assessments

33. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

34. I find fault causing injustice by delays in completing a full care assessment with a specialist deafblind assessor. The Council agreed to apologise, carry out a care assessment and make payment to Mrs X. I have made service improvement recommendations to address the failures identified.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman