Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision-making regarding Mr Y’s care plan. He complained the Council should increase the provision for Mr Y. He says this increased Mr Y’s isolation. He complained the Council did not provide transport for Mr Y to attend a day centre. He says this caused him unnecessary stress. We find no fault with the Council’s decision-making regarding the amount of provision in Mr Y’s care plan. We do find fault with the Council’s decision-making regarding transport for Mr Y. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, make a fresh decision and take service improvement action.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of Mr Y’s care plan. Specifically, he complains the Council:

1. Delayed completing Mr Y’s care plan in February 2024;
2. Did not provide enough suitable provision for Mr Y;
3. Did not provide transport for Mr Y to attend day centre; and
4. Did not provide suitable support for Mr X who is a carer for PA.

2. Mr X complains this increased Mr Y’s isolation and impacted Mr Y’s mental health. Mr X says it caused him unnecessary and avoidable stress because transporting Mr Y twice a day impacts his employment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We may investigate complaints from the person affected by the complaint issues, or from someone else if they have given their consent. If the person affected cannot give their consent, we may investigate a complaint from a person we decide is a suitable representative. (section 26A or 34C, Local Government Act 1974)
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
7. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. Mr X complains about matters which started in February 2024. Mr X brought this complaint to the Ombudsman in May 2025. As I have said above, we cannot investigate late complaints unless there is good reason. I consider Mr X could have complained sooner. Therefore, I will start my investigation from May 2024 which is 12 months before Mr X brought this complaint to us. For this reason, I will not investigate part a of the complaint.
9. I have investigated parts b, c and d of the complaint from May 2024.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

What should have happened

Day centre provision (part b of the complaint)

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. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan. 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. The process and outcomes should be built holistically around people’s wishes and feelings, their needs, values and aspirations, 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.
14. 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.

Transport (part c of the complaint)

15. The Council’s transport policy states a duty to provide transport only exists if it is deemed necessary for the eligible need to be met, with other options having been discounted. Other options include access to a family car with consideration of the availability of the driver, and an individual’s use of their Personal Independence Payment (PIP) mobility component. The test of eligibility is “Would the failure of the Council to fund transport result in an eligible need for support going unmet?"

Carer’s support (part d of the complaint)

16. Where somebody provides or intends to provide care for another adult and it appears the carer may have any needs for support, the council must carry out a carer’s assessment. A carer’s assessment must seek to find out not only the carer’s needs for support, but also the sustainability of the caring role itself. This includes the practical and emotional support the carer provides to the adult.
17. As part of the carer’s assessment, the council must consider the carer’s potential future needs for support. It must also consider whether the carer is, and will continue to be, able and willing to care for the adult needing care. (Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

What happened

18. Mr Y has several health needs. He receives Personal Independence Payment (PIP) benefits and additional weekly mobility benefit to help with disability related costs of travel. Mr Y received the enhanced rate of mobility benefit which totals £77.05 per week.
19. Prior to autumn 2024, the Council assessed Mr Y had care needs and required support to access his local community. It commissioned a care package to help him access his local community with the aim of working up to attend a day centre.
20. In autumn 2024, the care package broke down. The Council contacted Mr X’s preferred day centre placement and requested an assessment for Mr Y.
21. The Council completed a reassessment of Mr Y’s needs. It identified Mr Y was isolated and needed additional support to access the community. The assessment said Mr Y was not being supported by an unpaid carer.
22. The Council discussed transport to and from the day centre with Mr X. The Council said the family or an agency with carers could transport Mr Y to and from the day centre placement. Mr X told the Council he would consider the options.
23. The Council issued a care plan. It commissioned a day centre placement three days per week. The plan stated attending the day centre three days per week would support Mr Y adjust to a beneficial routine. The plan did not detail transport to and from the placement. It said it would review the care plan within 28 days of the placement starting.
24. The Council again discussed transport to and from the day centre with Mr X. Mr X asked the Council to consider funding transport for Mr Y. The Council told Mr X it was possible. The Council told Mr X that him driving Mr Y to the day centre may help Mr Y settle in.
25. In mid-December, the day centre placement became available. Mr Y began attending a few weeks later. Mr X drove Mr Y to and from the day centre.
26. In January, the Council held a meeting to review the care plan. Mr X attended with another family member and the day centre manager and a Council officer. The attendees agreed Mr Y appeared to be settling in well. Mr X told the Council he was unable to drive Mr Y to and from the day centre long term. The day centre manager shared the details of a specific taxi company used by other day centre attendees. The Council officer agreed to make enquiries into other transport arrangements.
27. The Council officer called several taxi companies. The Council officer took details of the fare and insurance process in the event the passenger caused damage. The same day, the Council officer told Mr Y’s family member the Council would not commission transport for Mr Y. The Council officer advised the family to consider arranging private taxi transport. Mr Y’s family raised concerns about the suitability of that advise given Mr Y’s needs and behaviour.
28. In February, Mr X made a formal complaint to the Council.
29. The Council did not uphold any of Mr X’s complaint. In its response, the Council informed Mr X it would consider whether Mr Y would benefit from increased number of days at the day centre in its next care plan review. It considered the weekly PIP mobility benefit met the cost of taxi transport for Mr Y. It said it would reconsider its position if there was evidence the taxi transport costs more than the PIP mobility benefit.
30. The Council has scheduled another care plan review. Mr X continues to drive Mr Y to and from the day centre placement.

Analysis

Day centre provision (part b of the complaint)

31. Mr X would like the Council to commission the day centre placement for five days per week. The support plan detailing the day centre provision was completed by a suitable assessor and clearly details Mr Y’s needs and outcomes he wants to achieve. It shows a clear rationale detailing how three days per week at the day centre placement met Mr Y’s needs and outcomes. Three days at the day centre placement is an increase in hours of support in comparison to Mr Y’s care package prior to Autumn 2024. The Council confirms it will review the number of days at the placement during Mr Y’s next review. I am satisfied the Council has considered all relevant information in its decision-making regarding the amount of day centre provision per week. I find no fault with the Council’s decision-making and therefore I cannot question the outcome.

Transport (part c of the complaint)

32. The Council’s transport policy states it will only provide transport if no other modes of transport are available. It considers the use of a family car, with consideration of the availability of the driver. Mr X repeatedly told the Council the transport he provided was at risk of imminent breakdown. I consider the Council has not evidenced sufficient consideration of this information in line with its policy.
33. The Council’s transport policy states it expects people to put the money they receive from the mobility component of their PIP benefit towards any cost of transport. Mr Y is in receipt of the mobility component of benefits. The Council states there is no evidence the cost of taxi transport to and from the day centre three times per week is more than the amount Mr Y receives for his mobility component. However, the most someone can receive for the mobility component is £77.05 per week. If the Council had proactively completed this calculation using the journey fare obtained by its officer, it would see it costs more than the mobility benefit Mr Y receives. This oversight is fault. This fault has caused Mr X unnecessary and avoidable stress and uncertainty, which is injustice.
34. The Council only communicated its rationale regarding Mr Y’s mobility benefits in its complaint’s response. There is no evidence this rationale was discussed with Mr X or Mr Y’s family members before this. The Council’s complaint response states its officer did not say transport would be provided. However, the case records show its officer gave mixed messages regarding whether the Council would provide transport. Furthermore, the actions of its officer agreeing to explore alternative transport arrangements and contacting taxi companies caused Mr X additional confusion. The poor communication and delay in providing proper advice regarding the transport Mr Y is eligible for is fault. This fault caused Mr X unnecessary stress and uncertainty, which is injustice.
35. In its complaint response, the Council told Mr X it would reconsider its decision not to provide transport if there was evidence taxi journeys cost more than the mobility benefit Mr Y receives. I consider the evidence is present and agree reconsideration of its decision is appropriate.

Carer’s assessment (part d of the complaint)

36. The Council tells the Ombudsman it recorded Mr Y received no support by unpaid carers in error. It says it knew Mr X and Mr Y’s wider family offered him care and support. The Council had many opportunities to recognise the unpaid support Mr X was providing Mr Y. The Council’s failure to offer Mr X a carer’s assessment was fault. This fault caused Mr X unnecessary and avoidable uncertainty, which is injustice.
37. The Council tells the Ombudsman it will offer Mr X a carer’s assessment, which I consider is appropriate and a positive step, but does not remedy the injustice to Mr X or others in similar situations to Mr X who may also be affected.

Back to top

Action

38. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide a written apology to Mr X for the unnecessary and avoidable stress and uncertainty caused by the Council’s poor communication and delay in providing proper advice regarding the transport and not offering him a timely carer’s assessment.
2. Make a fresh decision regarding whether it will provide transport for Mr Y with consideration to the information in this decision statement and in accordance with its policy.
3. Offer Mr X a carer’s assessment.
4. Complete an action plan to establish whether its failure to offer a carer’s assessment to Mr X highlights a wider issue, and if so to tell us how it will improve how officers offer carer’s assessment to eligible people.
39. 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.
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