Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council dealt with her mother, Mrs Y’s, care and support needs. The Council was at fault for failing to offer a carers assessment and delaying in responding to Mrs X’s complaint. This caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty. The Council should apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y that the Council failed to support Mrs Y to move closer to her. She also says the Council failed to properly complete assessments, failed to provide care and support and poorly responded to her complaints.
2. Mrs X says this caused her significant distress in being worried about her mother and she had to travel many hours to care for her. She also says this has caused Mrs Y loneliness and anxiety because she had no family near to her.

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. 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)
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

What I have and have not investigated

6. Some of the events related to this complaint happened more than 12 months before Mrs X complained to us, in August 2025. I have not seen any good reason why Mrs X did not complain to us sooner. So, my investigation will start from August 2024, which is 12 months before she complained to us.
7. Mrs X also complained about matters that happened after the Council responded to her complaint in December 2024. We expect a Council to have an opportunity to investigate and reply to a complaint before we consider it. It would have been reasonable for Mrs X to have complained about matters that happened between the Council and Mrs Y after December 2024, before complaining to us. For this reason, I will not investigate any events relating to this complaint after December 2024.
8. If Mrs X remains unhappy with events after December 2024, she has the option of complaining to the Council about these matters.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mrs 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

Legislation and guidance

Assessment

11. 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.

Carer’s Assessment

12. 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. (Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

Care Plan

13. 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.

Mental Capacity Act

14. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 is the framework for acting and deciding for people who lack the mental capacity to make particular decisions for themselves. The Act (and the Code of Practice 2007) describes the steps a person should take when dealing with someone who may lack capacity to make decisions for themselves. It describes when to assess a person’s capacity to make a decision, how to do this, and how to make a decision on behalf of somebody who cannot do so.

Mental capacity assessment

15. A person aged 16 or over must be presumed to have capacity to make a decision unless it is established they lack capacity. A person should not be treated as unable to make a decision:

• because they make an unwise decision;
• based simply on: their age; their appearance; assumptions about their condition, or any aspect of their behaviour; or
• before all practicable steps to help the person to do so have been taken without success.

16. The council must assess someone’s ability to make a decision when that person’s capacity is in doubt. How it assesses capacity may vary depending on the complexity of the decision.

The care and support statutory guidance (CSSG)

17. Paragraph 20.1 says people with care and support needs may decide to move home, such as to be closer to family or to pursue education or employment opportunities, or because they want to live in another area. Where they decide to move to a new area and as a result their ordinary residence status changes, it is important to ensure care and support is in place during the move, so the person's wellbeing is maintained.
18. Paragraph 20.2 says where the person chooses to live in a different local authority area, the local authority that is currently arranging care and support and the authority to which they are moving must work together to ensure that there is no interruption to the person's care and support.
19. Paragraph 20.10 says the continuity of care process starts when the second authority is notified of the adult's intention to move. Local authorities may find out about the person's intention to move from the individual directly or through someone acting on their behalf, who may contact either the first authority or the second authority to tell them of their intentions. If the person has approached the first authority and informed them of their intention to move, the first authority should make contact with the second authority to tell them the person is planning on moving to their area.
20. Paragraph 20.13 says when the second authority is satisfied the person's intentions to move are genuine, it must provide the adult and the carer if also intending to move, with accessible information about the care and support available in its area.

Lasting Power of Attorney

21. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 introduced the “Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA)”. This replaced the Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA). An LPA is a legal document, which allows a person (‘the donor’) to choose one or more persons to make decisions for them, when they become unable to do so themselves. The 'attorney' or ‘donee’ is the person chosen to make a decision on the donor’s behalf. Any decision has to be in the donor’s best interests. This includes a Health and Welfare LPA which gives the attorney(s) the power to make decisions about the person's health and personal welfare, such as day-to-day care, medical treatment, or where they should live.

Background

22. Mrs Y was living independently in social housing, provided by the Council’s housing department. She had several health diagnoses, including dementia. Adult social care was not involved with Mrs Y’s housing.
23. Mrs Y told the Council’s adult social care department in 2023 that she was considering moving to a different area, which I shall call Council B, to be near to her daughter, Mrs X. At the same time, the Council identified that Mrs Y had eligible care and support needs, but Mrs Y declined any formal support. The Council decided Mrs Y had capacity to make this decision and ended its involvement.

What happened

24. Mrs X asked the Council to complete another care act assessment with Mrs Y in June 2024.
25. The Council visited Mrs Y and another one of her daughters on at the end of July to start the care act assessment. Mrs Y again expressed she wanted to move to the Council B area, so her family could provide informal support.
26. The Council told Mrs X it had no influence over rehousing, but it could provide a copy of its care act assessment to support Mrs Y’s housing application with Council B.
27. The Council finished the care act assessment on in early August, it confirmed that Mrs Y was eligible for care and support services, but she again declined any formal support. The Council noted that should Mrs Y move to Council B area, the family would be responsible for finding accommodation, but it would liaise with Council B to arrange a suitable care package.
28. Shortly after this, Mrs X expressed disappointment with the way in which the Council completed the care act assessment and questioned whether the assessor had any experience of dementia.
29. Mrs X complained to the Council in mid-August. She said adult social care had been involved with Mrs Y for over a year, but despite this, it had still not supported her to move to the Council B area. She also complained the Council:

• completed inadequate assessments and had no understanding of Mrs Y’s dementia;
• failed to listen to the family’s concerns; and
• poorly communicated with her.

30. A few days later, Mrs X told the Council she wanted it to fund support for Mrs Y in the Council B area when she identified accommodation.
31. The Council completed a mental capacity assessment with Mrs Y at the end of October 2024. This decided that Mrs Y lacked the capacity to make decisions about moving to the Council B area. It noted that Mrs X had an LPA for health and welfare, and so she was legally able to make decisions about this on behalf of Mrs X.
32. In late November, Mrs X expressed an urgency to the Council about Mrs Y moving to the Council B area. She said she wanted the Council to fund the move and include a care package. Mrs X also noted she was bidding on behalf of Mrs Y for sheltered accommodation in the Council B area.
33. The Council told Mrs X she should continue to look for suitable accommodation and then it could refer Mrs Y to Council B, to discuss eligibility for a care package. The Council discussed an interim care package while Mrs X found accommodation, which Mrs X agreed would be in Mrs Y’s best interests.
34. It also offered to complete a review of her eligible needs, but Mrs X expressed the previous assessment was accurate and so she did not need a reassessment.
35. At the beginning of December, the Council started to look for care providers to provide care and support for Mrs Y in her home. This was arranged and began in mid-December. At the end of December, Mrs Y withdrew her agreement for the care and support.
36. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint shortly after. It apologised for the delay in responding.

• It did not uphold her complaint it ignored her repeated requests for help and funding in moving Mrs X to the Council B area.
• It noted the practitioner who completed the care act assessment had dementia training and experience. Mrs Y’s other daughter was also present to support Mrs Y with the assessment. They identified that a care package was needed but Mrs Y declined this.
• It also explained that Mrs X said the assessment was an accurate reflection of Mrs Y’s needs and she did not need reassessment. The Council did not uphold that the assessments it completed were inadequate.
• There was no evidence of poor communication between Mrs X and the Council.
• It upheld and apologised that it had failed to offer a carers assessment.
• Mrs X would need to arrange accommodation for Mrs Y or ask Council B for help. The Council said it did not have any influence over rehousing decisions, but it could share information and refer to Council B to arrange a care package for Mrs X.

37. Mrs X moved to the Council B area in November 2025.

Findings

The Council failed to support Mrs Y to move closer to Mrs X

38. There was no duty on the adult social care team at the Council to provide Mrs Y with accommodation in its area or the Council B area. Mrs Y lived in social housing, which the Council’s housing department was responsible for. This was not associated with any care and support needs.
39. The Council could not make decisions about Mrs Y’s housing application with Council B, because that was Council B’s responsibility. Therefore, the Council was not at fault when it told Mrs X to continue dealing with Council B and saying it would only become involved once the family had identified suitable accommodation for Mrs Y in the Council B area.
40. I have also considered the Council’s actions in supporting Mrs Y’s move to the Council B area. Although Mrs Y told the Council she wanted to move in 2023, the family had not identified a suitable property by the end of my investigation period, which was December 2024.
41. As there was uncertainty about the move, and Mrs Y continued to decline care and support offered by the Council, there was no fault in the Council’s decision not to refer Mrs Y to Council B between August and December 2024.
42. The Council told Mrs X that it would refer Mrs Y to Council B if the family identified suitable accommodation. While I appreciate Mrs Y wanted to move closer to Mrs X, I am satisfied the Council did not have a responsibility to make those arrangements and there was no fault in the actions of the Council related to this matter.

The Council failed to complete assessments

43. Mrs X asked the Council to complete a care act assessment with Mrs Y in June 2024, which was just before the start of my investigation period. The Council started this assessment promptly and engaged one of Mrs Y’s daughters in the process to support her. The Council completed this assessment at the beginning of August 2024.
44. The Council responded to Mrs X’s request for a care act assessment promptly and so there was no fault in the actions of the Council here.
45. I have also considered the actions the Council took in completing the assessment.
46. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made their decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed an appropriate procedure, not considered relevant information, or not properly explained a decision it has made. We call this fault, and, where we find it, we can consider any consequences of the fault and ask the relevant council to address these.
47. However, we do not make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf, provide a right of appeal against their decisions, or seek to replace their judgement with our own. If a council has made a decision without fault then we cannot criticise it, no matter how strongly a complainant feels it is wrong. We do not uphold complaints simply because someone feels a council should have done something different.
48. What that means in this particular case is that it is not for me to make my own judgement about Mrs Y's care needs. However, I can consider whether the Council properly made its decisions about this during the assessment.
49. The Council engaged Mrs Y’s daughter in the assessment. There was no evidence of her raising any concerns at the time of the assessment. Mrs X did express disappointment with the way in which the Council completed the care act assessment shortly after the meeting. But, I also note she told the Council in November 2024, that she considered the Council’s assessment was adequate and so Mrs Y did not need a reassessment.
50. The Council also explained that this was completed by an adequately trained Council officer. There was no evidence of any fault in the way the Council completed the care act assessment and so I have no reason to criticise it.

The Council failed to provide care and support

51. Between August and December 2024, the Council considered that Mrs Y did have eligible care and support needs. Following its assessment in August 2024, it offered Mrs Y a care package. Mrs Y declined this. Both the Council and Mrs X considered Mrs Y to have capacity to make decisions around her care and support at this time, and so this was a decision she was entitled to take. There was no fault in the Council deciding that Mrs Y had the right to decline the care package.
52. In response to Mrs X asking for the Council to fund Mrs Y’s move to the Council B area in November 2024, the Council also re-offered the care and support in line with the assessment it completed in August 2024. When Mrs X and Mrs Y agreed to this, the Council quickly arranged this, until Mrs Y again ended the support at the end of December 2024. There was no fault in the actions of the Council related to this matter because it acted in line with Mrs Y’s care and support plan.
53. It was however clear in the August 2024 assessment and in Mrs Y’s explanation of declining the formal care package that she relied heavily on informal support from her daughters, including Mrs X. Despite this, the Council did not offer any of Mrs Y’s daughters a carers assessment.
54. The CSSG says a council must carry out a carers assessment where somebody provides care for another adult and it appears the carer may need support. The Council has already accepted it failed to offer a carers assessment. This was fault which likely caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty about the support available to her during this long period of informal support.
55. I will not ask the Council to complete a carers assessment now, as I understand that Mrs Y is now living in the Council B area, but I will ask the Council to apologise and make a payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The poorly responded to Mrs X’s complaints

56. I have considered the documents from Mrs X’s complaint, and I note that all parts of the complaint were considered and addressed by the Council and it considered her desired outcomes. I understand Mrs X did not agree with the Council’s complaint response, but there was no fault in its reply.
57. However, the Council delayed considerably in responding, taking around three and a half months to respond. This considerable delay was fault, which likely caused Mrs X avoidable uncertainty and frustration.

Back to top

Action

58. Within a month of the date of my final decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Mrs X for the frustration and uncertainty caused to her by its faults. 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 its apology; and
• make a payment of £150 to Mrs X to remedy the frustration and uncertainty caused by the Council failing to offer a carers assessment and delaying in responding to her complaint.
59. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman