Summary: Miss Y complained the Council delayed progressing her daughter’s care and support, failed to implement adequate provision, and did not provide her with appropriate carer support. We find fault in the delay in completing the assessment and progressing matters, but we do not find fault in the Council’s inability to provide services or respite where her daughter declined support. The delay caused frustration and uncertainty to Miss Y, but did not result in a loss of care provision to Miss X. The Council’s apologies and allocation of a new social worker provide a proportionate remedy for the injustice identified.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains the Council has repeatedly failed to fulfil its statutory duties in relation to her daughter’s care. In particular, she raises concerns about:
1. Delays in issuing the Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan;
2. The absence of a meaningful transition to adult services;
3. Failure to implement agreed support plans; and
4. Failure to provide appropriate carer support.
2. As a consequence, her daughter has been left without necessary care and support, and Miss Y has been left without respite. She states this has adversely affected both of their physical and mental health, caused financial hardship, and delayed her daughter’s development as a young person.

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. 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
6. Miss Y did not raise matters (a) and (b) with the Council through its complaints procedure before bringing them to the Ombudsman. I consider it was reasonable for her to have done so. I have therefore not investigated these parts of the complaint, and Miss Y should refer them to the Council in the first instance.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Miss Y 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

Assessment

9. 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.
10. Councils must carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Councils should tell people when their assessment will take place and keep them informed throughout the assessment.

Carer’s Assessment

11. 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.

Refusal of assessment

12. An adult with possible care and support needs or a carer may choose to refuse an assessment. In these circumstances councils do not have to carry out an assessment. Where a council identifies that an adult lacks mental capacity and that carrying out a needs assessment would be in the adult’s best interests, it must do so.

Direct payments

13. 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.
14. Councils must tell people during the care planning stage which of their needs direct payments could meet. However, councils must consider requests for direct payments made at any time and have clear and quick procedures in place to respond to them.
15. After considering the suitability of the person requesting direct payments against the conditions in the Care Act 2014, the council must decide whether to provide a direct payment.

What happened

16. In January 2025, the Council began a care and support assessment for Miss X.
17. In April, the Council met with Miss X and Miss Y to discuss a proposed support plan. The draft plan included five hours of support per week.
18. Later that month, Miss Y complained to the Council. She said the proposed support was insufficient and did not properly reflect Miss X’s needs. She was concerned the plan relied heavily on her continuing to provide significant care. She also said there was no provision for direct payments, no clear timescale for implementation, and no arrangement for regular or emergency respite.
19. The Council responded and apologised for the delay between the initial assessment visit and the April meeting, explaining this was due to staff absence. It said the April meeting had been to discuss a draft plan and that, once Miss X agreed to it, funding would be requested and a direct payment could then be considered. The Council described the proposed five hours as a starting point, to be reviewed after six weeks. It asked Miss Y to provide further details about the level of support and respite she believed was required.
20. Miss Y escalated her complaint. She reiterated concerns about delay and requested a direct payment backdated to January 2025. She said Miss X required 16 hours of support per week during term time and 27 hours during school holidays, together with weekly and emergency respite provision.
21. In June, the Council issued its final complaint response. It apologised for delays, confirmed a new social worker had been allocated, and said the requested level of support and a direct payment could be discussed with the new worker. It also apologised for the time taken to complete a carer’s assessment for Miss Y.
22. In July, Miss Y brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.
23. In August, the Council provided further information. It accepted there had been an unreasonable delay in completing Miss X’s assessment and apologised. The Council confirmed Miss X had eligible care and support needs but said she had made clear she did not wish the Council to arrange services to meet those needs. The Council stated it could not compel her to accept support.
24. In September, the Council completed Miss Y’s carer’s assessment. It signposted her to a local carers’ centre for additional support and explained respite services could not be arranged without Miss X’s agreement to receive support.

My findings

Implementation of the support plan

25. The Council has accepted there were delays in progressing Miss X’s assessment and apologised for this. Delay in completing an assessment and moving matters forward amounts to fault.
26. However, the Council has since allocated a new social worker and confirmed Miss X has eligible needs. The evidence shows Miss X has declined support from the Council to meet those needs. The Council cannot require an adult with capacity to accept services.
27. In these circumstances, while there was delay, I do not find Miss X has lost care provision as a result of that delay because she has chosen not to accept Council-arranged support. The Council’s apology and steps taken to prevent further delay are a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused by the delay itself.

Carer support

28. There was also delay in completing Miss Y’s carer’s assessment. The Council has apologised and has now completed the assessment.
29. Miss Y has not been able to access respite because this would require Miss X’s agreement to receive support services. The evidence shows Miss X has declined such involvement. This limitation arises from Miss X’s decision and not from fault by the Council.
30. The Council has signposted Miss Y to a carers’ centre to explore other sources of support available to her. In the circumstances, this is an appropriate response. I therefore find no further fault in the Council’s handling of carer support.

Back to top

Decision

31. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has already provided a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman