Summary: The Council failed to communicate with Mrs X and her daughter, Mrs K, when it arranged care with a new care provider. The Council also failed to tell Mrs X or Mrs K that it was possible to seek an alternative provider and it did not address their complaint about this fully. The Council’s shortcomings caused Mrs X and Mrs K distress and frustration. Mrs X cancelled the care, but the injustice is limited because it is likely that the Council would have ended the care package. The Council has already made some service improvements and it will apologise to Mrs X and Mrs K for the impact of its shortcomings.

The complaint

1. Mrs K complains that the Council failed to manage her mother, Mrs X’s, move to a new care provider properly. It did not tell her it was happening, nor that she could have an alternative agency when problems arose. It did not act quickly enough when Mrs X cancelled the care package and told her this could be reinstated, but later refused to do so.
2. Mrs K says the Council’s shortcomings left Mrs X without care and the family had to do this for her. Mrs K says it caused both her and her mother distress and frustration, and put their relationship under strain. At that time Mrs K had been diagnosed with cancer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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

5. I considered evidence provided by Mrs K and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mrs K 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

The law and guidance

7. Intermediate care and reablement support services are for people usually after they have left hospital or when they are at risk of having to go into hospital. They are time-limited and aim to help a person to preserve or regain the ability to live independently. Regulations require intermediate care and reablement to be provided without charge for up to six weeks. This is for all adults, whether or not they have eligible needs for ongoing care and support.
8. 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.
9. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for them to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They enable people to arrange their own care and support to meet those needs. The council must ensure people have relevant and timely information about direct payments so they can decide whether to request them. If they do so, the council should support them to use and manage the payment properly.

What happened

10. In March 2025, Mrs X was admitted to hospital for emergency surgery. She was discharged from hospital on 17 March and reablement care started. To begin with this was four calls each day to help Mrs X with her personal care and meals. However, after a few weeks, Mrs X found that she did not need that many care calls and she was declining care. The Council reviewed her needs and decided to reduce calls to twice daily.
11. At the beginning of April, the Council’s reablement physiotherapist visited Mrs X and found that she could not leave the house safely but she could prepare simple meals for herself.
12. Mrs X’s free reablement care was due to come to an end. The Council said it called Mrs X and Mrs K to discuss her ongoing home care and to let them know that it would be moving this to a new care provider to call twice a day. The Council says it left a message for Mrs X and Mrs K. Mrs K says neither her nor her mother had any messages.
13. The new care provider visited Mrs X at home. She called Mrs K to help her speak to the new carer provider. They had no warning that the new provider was taking over the care. Mrs K told the provider that English was not her mother’s first language and so communication with the care workers that visit would be very important.
14. The new care provider started working with Mrs X on 12 April. The Council’s reablement physiotherapists continued to call to check on her progress and to help her regain her independence.
15. The Council’s case notes say that on 22 April the physiotherapist visited and Mrs X was upset that the care workers would not clean her house or take her out. The physiotherapist observed that Mrs X no longer needed support for her personal care and she could use the stairs with close supervision. The Council did not tell Mrs X or Mrs K that it had decided this.
16. Mrs X asked to cancel the care provider. The care provider asked the Council to confirm this. Mrs K called the Council’s physiotherapist. The notes say that her mother wanted to cancel the carers. She asked for a direct payment to pay for help with cleaning and domestic chores and for a carer to take her mother out. The physiotherapist told Mrs K that her mother’s needs would need to be reviewed by the social care team if she needed direct payment and an ongoing care package. The physiotherapist told the care provider it could stop working with Mrs X.
17. The next day Mrs K spoke to the Council’s social worker. The social worker understood that Mrs X wanted direct payments and advised that the Council would assess her needs and finances.
18. The case notes show the Council decided that as Mrs X no longer had care needs, it would not reassess her for a direct payment. Again, the Council did not tell Mrs X or Mrs K its decision.
19. The Council called Mrs K the next day. Mrs K explained that Mrs X still had care needs, particularly in washing her lower body, but she had cancelled the care due to problems with the care workers of the new agency. Ms K said they did not introduce themselves and would not write down their names for Mrs X, or do what she asked. The Council said that had it known, it could have discussed getting a different care provider. The Council said the manager would call Mrs K but this did not happen.
20. The Council’s case notes show that the social care team consulted the physiotherapists to look at a joint review of Mrs X’s care needs. The physiotherapist team explained that its clinical assessment was that Mrs X was independent and had no care needs, as such it would not visit to reassess Mrs X’s needs.
21. Mrs K complained to the Council that it had not dealt with the change to the new care provider properly, and had not explained that Mrs X could have asked for a different care provider if she was having difficulties with the care workers until she had already cancelled the care.
22. The Council responded to Mrs K’s complaint. The Council acknowledged that it should have communicated with Mrs X and Mrs K better. It said it should not have left a message about her care provider changing, but should have made sure that this was properly communicated to them. It apologised for this and reminded the relevant staff that changes to care should be communicated directly.
23. The Council said that it had not known that Mrs X was unhappy with the care workers until after she had cancelled her care. Its physiotherapists had understood Mrs X did this because she no longer needed the support. Mrs K says that she had told the physiotherapists that her mother still had care needs but was unhappy with the carers.

Was there fault by the Council causing an injustice to Mrs X and Mrs K?

24. The Council has acknowledged that it did not communicate with Mrs X and Mrs K properly when it stopped the reablement care, and changed Mrs X’s care to the new care provider. It has apologised and reminded staff that changes in care must be communicated directly. The fault by the Council caused Mrs X and Mrs K distress. The apology and reminder to staff is sufficient to remedy the impact on them of the mishandled communication.
25. However, I have found further fault. The Council’s response to Mrs K’s complaint failed to address that the Council did not make clear to Mrs X or Mrs K that they could have requested a change of care provider. The Council also failed to explain that its physiotherapist had already decided that Mrs X no longer had care needs and that it would not reassess her for this reason. Again, the mishandled communication is fault by the Council.
26. Mrs K has explained that cancelling the care package had an enormous impact on the family, as they then had to provide care, and this was especially difficult when as Mrs K was herself having treatment for cancer.
27. I can see that this caused Mrs X and Mrs K frustration. However, it is not clear that had the Council acted without fault, then the outcome would have been significantly different. This is because the Council understood over several conversations, that Mrs X wanted domestic and befriending help rather than a different care provider to deliver the same package of care. More importantly, the Council assessed that Mrs X no longer had care and support needs that would result in a package of care or direct payments. This decision was based on the Council’s observations and professional judgement and so I have no basis to criticise this. It is likely that the Council would have ceased the care package even if Mrs X had not cancelled it.

Back to top

Action

28. Within one month of the date of this decision, the Council will apologise to Mrs X and to Mrs K for the impact on them of the further fault I have found. The Council should consider an apology to Mrs X in person to take account of her communication needs. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
29. 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 has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman