Summary: We have found the Council at fault for incorrectly telling Miss X that the respite time she received for her daughter, Miss Y was significant reducing. This caused the family avoidable distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained on behalf of her daughter, Miss Y about the Council’s proposal to reduce her respite provision from 60 to 28 nights per year. She said the Council applied a blanket policy rather than basing it on her daughter’s needs and circumstances. She said the Council suggested residential care for her daughter which the family did not want. She said the whole situation caused significant distress for the family and has left them worrying for the future.

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. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Miss X 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

Law and guidance

6. 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)
7. The Care Act 2014 says the council may meet the carer’s needs by providing a service directly to the adult needing care. The carer must still receive a support plan which covers their needs, and how the council will meet them. The carer’s personal budget must be an amount that enables the carer to meet their needs to continue to fulfil their caring role. It must also consider what the carer wishes to achieve in their day-to-day life. Part of the planning process should be to agree how the carer will use the personal budget to meet their needs. (Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

What happened

8. Miss X’s adult daughter, Miss Y has complex learning disabilities. She lives at home with her family. The family provides most of the support she needs, and the Council provides respite care for 60 days/nights a year.
9. In February 2025, Miss X contacted the Council. She said that due to a change in Miss Y’s behaviour, the family was struggling and needed a break. She requested some extra respite days.
10. The Council informed Miss X that it had changed its respite policy and that all service users would be entitled to a maximum of 28 days of respite. Miss X said she challenged this, but the Council told her there were no exceptions.
11. In March, a Council officer visited Miss X and Miss Y at home. They discussed the changes in Miss Y’s behaviour and the reduction in respite. The Council’s viewpoint remained unchanged.
12. Miss X complained to the Council in April 2025. She said she had serious concerns about the blanket policy and believed the Council should assess Miss Y’s needs and make a decision based on her specific circumstances.
13. The Council responded and confirmed that it was introducing the maximum number of respite days to ensure all residents received the support they needed. The Council said that it would reassess Miss Y and update her needs assessment.
14. Miss X spoke to the Council in April and May about Miss Y’s needs. The Council suggested that Miss Y might want to move into a care home if supporting her at home was too hard without the 60 days of respite. Miss X said that she and her family were significantly distressed at the thought of this as they never wanted Miss Y to move into a facility.
15. Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in May 2025.

Update

16. At the end of June, the Council contacted Miss X. It said that it had reconsidered Miss Y’s case and decided that she should keep the 60 days of respite.
17. In September, the Council contacted the Ombudsman. It explained that the ‘new’ respite policy was introduced by a temporary head of service and the Council had never approved it or implemented it. It confirmed that Miss Y would continue to receive the 60 days respite that she had received for many years.
18. In late September, the Council issued Miss Y’s updated care and support plan. It included 60 days of respite per year.

My findings

19. The Council told service users about a ‘new’ respite policy even though it had not been approved. The Council did not implement the policy and therefore Miss Y did not miss out on any respite days. Therefore, Miss X and Miss Y did not experience any quantifiable injustice.
20. However, the distress and uncertainty that the misinformation caused the family was significant. The family was left to believe for 5 months that the number of respite days would significantly reduce. During this time, they struggled with the difficult decision whether to move Miss Y into a care home.
21. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and make a symbolic payment of £500 for the distress caused.
22. The Council has also agreed to review the process of how policy changes are distributed to staff to ensure that changes are not shared with until they have been ratified.

Back to top

Agreed action

23. Within 4 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X for the misinformation that caused her and her family significant distress.
2. Pay Miss X £500 in recognition of the avoidable distress caused by the Council’s fault.
24. Within 12 weeks of my decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide details of the process the Council follows for agreeing and distributing policy changes to prevent misinformation.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to actions to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman