Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to complete a Care Act assessment following his request. The Council significantly delayed in completing the assessment. This caused Mr X distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has already apologised and decided to make a payment to remedy the injustice caused. The Council will also make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to complete a Care Act assessment following his March 2025 request.
2. Mr X says this caused him to be without care and support that he needed.

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated the circumstances of Mr X’s complaint between March 2025 and November 2025. I have not considered any matters after November 2025 because this is the time that the Ombudsman accepted his complaint and I cannot consider any ongoing matters after this date.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

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.

Care Plan

11. 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. 

What happened?

12. At the end of March 2025, Mr X contacted the Council asking it to complete a Care Act assessment due to the severe disrepairs in his accommodation and the impact this was having on his health and wellbeing. He noted that he was disabled and vulnerable.
13. In early July, Mr X complained to the Council that it had failed to complete the requested Care Act assessment.
14. Mr X emailed the Council again about the same matter in early September.
15. The Council allocated a social worker to complete the Care Act assessment in January 2026. They finished the assessment in early-February.
16. The assessment decided Mr X had eligible needs and offered him six hours support per week, to meet these needs
17. In mid-February 2026, the Council emailed Mr X to apologise that it had failed to send him a response to his complaint. It attached a complaint response dated October 2025. This apologised for the delay in progressing his request for a Care Act assessment and delaying in responding to his complaint. It accepted it had failed to send both his assessment request and complaint to the responsible service.
18. It apologised for the delays and offered Mr X a financial remedy of £80 to recognise the injustice caused by poor customer service and the delays.

Response to our enquiries

19. The Council told me that Mr X declined the six hours support identified in the Care Act assessment because he believed he was eligible for more support.
20. The Council acknowledged the significant delay in responding to Mr X’s request for an assessment. It said this was because of an oversight in allocating the request to the correct team and then a high level of demand on its services.
21. The Council said it would like to offer Mr X a symbolic payment of £750 to recognise the distress the delay caused him and his time and trouble in making the complaint.

Findings

22. The legislation does not say how quickly a council must complete a Care Act assessment. We expect councils to complete assessments in a timeframe that is proportionate to the complexity of the issues, and normally within 4-6 weeks.
23. Despite Mr X asking for a Care Act assessment in March 2025, it took the Council until February 2026 to complete this. This significant delay was fault.
24. The Council said this delay was because of an initial oversight and then because of the high level of demand on its services, which led to a delay in allocating a social worker to complete the assessment. Although this accounts for the timeframes, the delay was nevertheless excessive.
25. The Council also accepted fault for delaying in responding to Mr X’s complaint.
26. I have considered the injustice these delays caused Mr X. I note that when the Council did complete its assessment and decided Mr X was eligible for six hours of weekly support, Mr X declined this, as he felt this was not enough.
27. For this reason, I cannot say, whether Mr X would have accepted the care and support had the Council completed the Care Act assessment sooner. So, I cannot say, even on balance, that the Council’s delay led to Mr X missing out on provision.
28. For this reason, the injustice caused to Mr X by the Council’s delay in completing the assessment and responding to his complaint is likely limited to distress, frustration and uncertainty. I welcome that the Council has recognised these failings, apologised and offered a symbolic financial remedy of £750 to recognise the injustice caused.
29. This financial remedy is likely more than we would recommend when considering our guidance, so I have no grounds to recommend that the Council increase this payment for the faults identified.
30. I will however ask the Council to make service improvements to reduce the risk of this happening again in the future.
31. I understand that Mr X remains unhappy with the outcome of the Care Act assessment and care and support plan. This is not something that I can investigate as it is a matter that happened outside of the timeframe of my investigation. Mr X had the option of complaining to the Council about this, which I believe he has done.

Back to top

Action

32. Within four weeks of my final decision the Council will:

• offer Mr X the payment of £750 that the Council has determined is appropriate. This is to remedy the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the Council delaying completing the Care Act assessment and responding to his complaint. The Council should deduct the £80 already offered if it has already made this payment to Mr X.

33. Within eight weeks of my final decision, the Council will:

• send us an action plan outlining the measures the Council will take to ensure all Care Act assessment requests are appropriately recorded, processed and allocated to a worker for completion; and
• we publish the Complaint Handling Code which sets out best practice in how councils should deal with complaints. In this case, we found the Council at fault because it delayed in responding to the complaint. In order to prevent similar faults from happening in future, the Council should consider our guidance and tell us what action(s) it will take to improve the way it deals with complaints.

34. 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