Summary: Miss X complained that the Council did not provide enough support during a house move. We have found the Council was at fault for poor communication, causing distress and uncertainty. However, it provided the agreed support on the day of the move. The Council apologised and offered a remedy payment, which remedies Miss X’s injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss X, who received a package of care and support from the Council, complains that the Council failed to help her move house. She says she felt let down by the Council’s communication and did not feel fully supported, which resulted in her having to leave furniture behind.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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.
5. Miss 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 happened

6. In mid-August 2024, Miss X contacted the Council to request additional support with a planned house move at the end of August. This included a request for financial assistance.
7. The Council discussed financial support with Miss X and agreed it would seek advice on what other support could be provided to assist with the move. The Council also agreed that someone would update her.
8. A few days later, Miss X signed a tenancy termination notice. This confirmed that the Council could dispose of any items left at the property and that Miss X could be charged the reasonable cost of removing any rubbish or belongings left behind.
9. Miss X was known to Adult Social Care and was already receiving support from a community support provider. A duty social worker contacted the provider to discuss changing the day Miss X usually received support to help with the move. The provider contacted Miss X to confirm this could be arranged. The Council did not update Miss X directly, as it had agreed to do.
10. Before the move took place, Miss X made a complaint to the Council about the lack of direct communication and the difficulties she had experienced in contacting the local social work team.
11. On the day before the move, Miss X contacted the provider to confirm that her support would arrive at 9am, which was confirmed.
12. On the day of the move, the removal company arrived earlier than agreed. Miss X contacted the care provider to check whether her named support worker was still attending. The support worker arrived shortly before 9am.
13. The community support provider had agreed to support Miss X on the day but had not been asked to help with packing. Packing had already been completed before the support worker arrived. The removal company moved the furniture, while the support worker assisted with some lightweight bags.
14. After the removal company left, the support worker checked the property with Miss X to make sure she had everything before transporting her to the new property.
15. Miss X was asked to return the keys to the property by mid-September but returned them 11 days later than requested. During this period, Miss X did not request any further support to remove remaining items from the property.
16. In early October 2024, the Council’s Voids Team attended the property. Due to its condition, additional clearance and hygiene work was required. The Council did not charge Miss X for these costs.
17. Later in October 2024, the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint and apologised. It explained that it would remind the team, as part of reflective learning, of the importance of contacting people in a timely manner. It also acknowledged an increase in call volumes and apologised for Miss X’s experience.
18. Later that month, Miss X escalated her complaint. She said she felt let down. She also said she had to leave items behind because she was left to pack alone.
19. The Council apologised for the impact on Miss X’s wellbeing and the distress caused by the uncertainty and delays in communication. It offered a remedy payment of £150.

My findings

20. The Council agreed to update Miss X about the support that could be provided to assist with her move, but it did not do so. This was a failure in communication, for which the Council was at fault.
21. Miss X was already receiving support from a community support provider. The Council appropriately contacted the provider to arrange a change of support day to assist with the move. However, the Council did not inform Miss X directly that this had been arranged, which contributed to her uncertainty and distress.
22. The community support provider attended as agreed on the day of the move and provided the support it had been asked to provide. There is no evidence the provider failed to deliver the agreed support.
23. Miss X experienced avoidable distress and frustration due to the Council’s poor communication and delays in responding, particularly given her known vulnerabilities and involvement with Adult Social Care.
24. Miss X did not request additional support to remove remaining items after the move and retained the keys beyond the agreed return date. The Council was entitled to clear the property once the tenancy ended.
25. The Council has acknowledged fault, apologised, and offered a £150 remedy payment to recognise the distress caused by its communication failures. It also decided not to charge Miss X for clearance and hygiene work needed after she left the property.
26. These are proportionate remedies for her injustice, so, although the Council was at fault, no further action is needed.

Back to top

Decision

27. The Council was at fault for poor communication, which caused Miss X distress and uncertainty. However, it provided the agreed support on the day of the move. The Council apologised and offered a £150 payment, which appropriately remedies her injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman