Summary: The Council was at fault for the time it took to carry out a review of Ms X’s care needs, for the way it reduced some aspects of her care and for its complaint handling. This meant Ms X could not be sure she was receiving the correct support to meet her needs. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, make a payment for the uncertainty caused and carry out a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the way the Council carried out a care review of her needs and its decision to reduce the number of hours of care she received.
2. She said this has impacted her physical health, emotional health and finances as she sold possessions to pay for care.

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. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. 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

Law and guidance

8. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). 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. 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.
9. 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.
10. Councils should have clear procedures to deal with social care complaints. Regulations and guidance say they should investigate and resolve complaints quickly and efficiently. A single stage procedure should be enough. The council should include in its complaint response:

• how it considered the complaint;
• the conclusions reached about the complaint, including any required remedy; and
• whether it is satisfied all necessary action has been or will be taken by the organisations involved; and
• details of the complainant’s right to complain to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.
  (Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009)

What happened

11. Ms X has care needs. She had a care and support plan in place which involved her receiving personal care in her home.
12. In January 2024, Ms X asked the Council to reassess her care needs as her marriage had broken down and she was living alone. Ms X also said she believed her health had deteriorated and needed extra support during the day and at night.
13. Ms X wrote to the Council in April 2024 to chase up her request for a care review.
14. In October 2024, the Council carried out a review of Mr X’s care needs. The review noted Ms X’s circumstances had changed as she had split from her husband and they were no longer living together. The review noted Ms X used to get 4 hours respite care for her husband so no longer needed this. As part of the review Ms X explained she was struggling and asked the Council for an increase in her support during the evenings.
15. The outcome of the care review was that the Council decided to reduce the hours of care Ms X received by 4 hours per week as she was no longer living with her husband so did not need the 4 hours for respite. The notes from the care review say there has not been any change in Ms X’s needs. The Council also increased the evening care call for Ms X to 30 minutes in the evening and reduced the amount of time Ms X previously had for assistance with her meal preparation to account for this.
16. After being told about the change in care Ms X raised concerns with the Council about her hours of care being reduced. In late October 2024, the Council told Ms X it would carry out a further review in three months.
17. Ms X made a formal complaint to the Council in early December 2024 about its decision to reduce her hours of care. Ms X said she wanted the Council to carry out another review of her care and did not want to wait three months for this. Ms X said she did not believe the Council properly considered her care needs and her health and mobility had deteriorated.
18. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint on 16 April 2025. The Council said:
• It apologised for the delay responding to the complaint.
• The social worker carrying out the review identified Ms X had support from a relative and it had provided clear evidence for the reduction in Ms X’s care package.
19. Ms X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman. Ms X has since moved to another Council area.

Findings

20. Ms X initially asked the Council to carry out a review of her care needs in January 2024 and chased this up in April 2024. The Council did not carry out the review until October 2024, some nine months later. This was fault. While there is not a timescale in the Care Act 2024 for completing reviews they should be completed as quickly as is reasonably practicable and in a timely manner proportionate to the person’s needs.
21. While this was fault, I do not consider it caused significant injustice to Ms X. This is because the Council decided to reduce her hours of care. Had the Council carried out the review sooner it may have reduced Ms X’s hours of care sooner.
22. Ms X said the Council did not properly assess her needs at the review and wrongly reduced her hours of care. The notes from the review showed the Council decided to reduce Ms X’s hours of care by 4 hours per week as she previously received 4 hours of respite as she cared for her husband. As Ms X and her husband were no longer living together the Council decided she did not need these hours of respite.
23. The Council decided to reduce the number of hours by 2.5 hours per week for assistance Ms X received with meal preparation and increase her night time support. Notes from the review showed Ms X needed care and support to prepare meals, could not stand for long to prepare meals and needed prompting to eat. There is nothing to indicate that her needs and support regarding meal preparation had changed and there are no reasons given as to why this support had been reduced. This was fault. Without a proper explanation and reasons as to why the Council decided to reduce the hours of support for meal preparation, Ms X cannot be sure the Council properly considered her needs when carrying out the review of her care. This will have caused Ms X uncertainty.
24. The Council also should have carried out a light touch review within 6-8 weeks of the October 2024 care review. I have not seen evidence that it did this. This was fault and a missed opportunity to see if the new package of care was working for Ms X.
25. The Council was at fault for the time it took to respond to Ms X’s complaint. The Council’s complaints policy says it aims to respond to complaints within 60 working days, however it took 90 working days to respond to Ms X’s complaint. As a result Ms X had to wait longer than she should have to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Agreed Action

26. Within one month of my final decision the Council agreed to carry out the following:
• Apologise to Ms X for the injustice caused to her from the above faults.
• Pay Ms X £200 to recognise the uncertainty she experienced as a result of the Council not justifying why it reduced her hours for meal preparation.
• Consider why there were significant delays in complaint handling in this case. The Council should look at whether there are any steps it can take to improve its response times to complaints and report back to the Ombudsman with the changes it intends to make.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice. The Council agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman