Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to complete a Care Act assessment for her son in a timely manner. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to provide adequate communication and/or updates regarding the assessment process. She says the Council’s actions contributed to a significant deterioration in her son’s mental health as well as negatively impacting her own mental and physical health. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy, review its care and support plan for Mrs X’s son and provide evidence of the service improvements it has made.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to complete a Care Act assessment for her son in a timely manner. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to provide adequate communication and/or updates to her regarding the assessment process. She says the Council’s actions contributed to a significant deterioration in her son’s mental health, leading him to become virtually housebound. Mrs X says the Council’s actions also had a significant impact on her own mental and physical health. Mrs X would like the Council to complete a full Care Act assessment and produce a needs-led care and support plan for her son. She would also like the Council to make improvements to its service to prevent a recurrence.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have exercised discretion to investigate Mrs X’s complaint dating back to October 2023. The period subject to investigation ends in September 2025, when Mrs X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an initial draft of this decision. I considered any comments received and made amendments to the draft decision statement. Mrs X and the Council also had an opportunity to comment on the amended draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Care Act 2014

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.
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. 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.
12. Section 27 of the Care Act 2014 says councils should keep care and support plans under review. Government Care and Support Statutory Guidance says councils should review plans at least every 12 months. Councils should consider a light touch review six to eight weeks after agreeing and signing off the plan and personal budget. They should carry out reviews as quickly as is reasonably practicable in a timely manner proportionate to the needs to be met. Councils must also conduct a review if an adult or a person acting on the adult’s behalf makes a reasonable request for one.
13. When carrying out a review of a care and support plan, councils should ensure the process is person-centred and outcome focussed. They must involve the person and the carer where feasible, and must consider if an independent advocate may be appropriate. Councils should consider:
• If the person’s circumstances or needs have changed
• What is working in the plan, what is not working and what might need to change
• Whether the outcomes in the plan have been achieved
• If the person has new outcomes they want to meet
• Whether improvements could be made to achieve better outcomes
• Whether the person, carer or advocate is satisfied with the plan
14. 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.

Carer’s Assessment

15. 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.
16. As part of the carer’s assessment, the council must consider the carer’s potential future needs for support. It must also consider whether the carer is, and will continue to be, able and willing to care for the adult needing care. (Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

What happened

17. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
18. Mrs X’s son, Mr Y, has a diagnosis of autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and complex mental health challenges. Mr Y lives with his parents and received support from his sister via a direct payment arrangement. Mrs X attended regular meetings as part of a Care and Education Treatment Review (CETR) to ensure Mr Y’s care, education and treatment needs were being met.
19. In October 2023, the CETR acknowledged that Mr Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan would cease at the end of the academic year, and that there was no planned transition for Mr Y after his placement at college ended. The CETR identified that Mr Y would benefit from a Care Act assessment.
20. On 14 December 2023, a member of the CETR panel emailed the Council directly, requesting an updated Care Act assessment for Mr Y.
21. The Council allocated a social worker to Mr Y’s case in January 2024. It recorded that a Care Act assessment and a review of the direct payments made in respect of Mr Y was required.
22. The Council allocated Mr Y’s case to another social worker later that same month. The social worker visited Mrs X and Mr Y on 30 January 2024 to review the direct payment arrangement.
23. On 15 February 2024, Mrs X emailed the CETR panel and the Council to ask for clarification as to who would complete the Care Act assessment. The Council replied on the same day. It said if Mr Y’s EHC Plan was due to end in May 2024, he may require a Care Act assessment. The Council said an assessment was only required when there is a change in circumstances, and at that time, there was no change to Mr Y’s plan regarding the direct payment.
24. On 29 April 2024, the Council received contact from the CETR. It stated Mr Y needed an updated Care Act assessment and/or an updated support plan ready for when he was due to leave college in June. The CETR asked the Council for clarity on who would be leading on overseeing Mr Y’s social care needs.
25. Mrs X says Mr Y’s EHC Plan ceased in June 2024.
26. The Council attended a CETR meeting on 18 June 2024. It said it had received a request to review Mr Y’s direct payments but had not received a request for a Care Act assessment. The CETR asked the Council to carry out a Care Act assessment for Mr Y.
27. Mrs X called the Council on 31 July 2024, stating she was waiting for a response as to whether the Council would conduct an assessment. Mrs X said at that time, Mr Y had no plan in place other than talking therapy.
28. Mrs X called the Council again on 5 August 2024 to chase a response.
29. The Council allocated a social worker to Mr Y’s case on 29 August 2024 with a view to carrying out a Care Act assessment.
30. The social worker called Mrs X on 2 September 2024. Mrs X explained that she and her husband, Mr X were the main source of support for Mr Y, and that Mr Y’s sister was acting as his personal assistant. Mrs X told the Council that Mr Y had made a number of attempts on his life. The social worker arranged to visit Mr Y later that month.
31. The Council’s social worker visited Mrs X and Mr Y at home on 10 September 2024. The social worker said the meeting was intended as an introduction to Mr Y of the assessment process, and that the assessment itself would start during a later visit.
32. The social worker visited Mr Y again on 8 October 2024. Mrs X says the social worker stopped the assessment without completing it because they said a multi-agency approach was needed.
33. Mrs X says she emailed the Council on 23 October 2024 to ask it to restart the Care Act assessment. Mrs X says Mr Y’s mental health had deteriorated considerably by this time.

Mrs X’s complaint

34. Mrs X complained to the Council on 7 November 2024 regarding its delay in completing a full Care Act assessment. Mrs X said Mr Y’s EHC Plan had ended in June 2024, leaving Mr Y without any plans or support. Mrs X said the Council’s social worker had missed an appointment to visit her at home and had then halted the assessment during the re-arranged appointment on 8 October 2024. Mrs X said she had subsequently tried to contact the Council to chase progress but had not received a response. Mrs X said the experience had exacerbated an already stressful situation which impacted Mr Y’s suicidal ideation and feelings of self-worth. She said Mr Y was entirely reliant on his family and was effectively stuck at home, contributing to a further decline in his wellbeing. Mrs X said the situation was also negatively impacting her as Mr Y’s main carer, as well as Mr X and the wider family.
35. Mrs X says the Council contacted her on 28 January 2025. Mrs X says the Council told her it would complete the Care Act assessment by 14 February 2025, and that it was investigating her complaint.
36. The Council met with Mr Y’s counsellor on 6 and 13 February 2025.
37. The Council provided its complaint response on 18 February 2025. It said that following its contact with Mrs X, it had agreed to continue to work with Mr Y’s counsellor to facilitate communication with Mr Y, with the aim of completing the Care Act assessment.
38. The Council wrote separately to Mr Y on the same day, apologising for the delays. The Council acknowledged Mr Y had waited a considerable amount of time for the Care Act assessment to be completed and acknowledged this had caused significant inconvenience and concern.
39. Mrs X called the Council on 3 March 2025 and 12 May 2025 to chase progress regarding the Care Act assessment.
40. Mrs X complained to the Council again on 23 May 2025 regarding the failure to complete a Care Act assessment and a lack of communication.
41. Mrs X says the support provided to Mr Y from his sister ended in June 2025.
42. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint on 10 July 2025. Regarding the assessment, the Council said it had been necessary to obtain input from external agencies; the Council acknowledged this may have contributed to the significant delay. The Council also acknowledged a lack of consistent communication with Mrs X throughout the process and acknowledged that this, and the delay, had caused uncertainty and frustration to Mrs X and Mr Y. The Council told Mrs X it would complete the Care Act assessment by 11 July 2025.
43. The Council completed the Care Act assessment in mid-July 2025 and produced a support plan for Mr Y. I acknowledge Mrs X’s comments stating she was unaware the Care Act assessment was completed at this time. Mrs X says she received no communication from the Council regarding the assessment during this period. Mrs X also says neither she nor Mr Y received a copy of the subsequent support plan.
44. Mrs X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s complaint response and brought the matter to the Ombudsman.

Analysis – delays in the Care Act assessment process

45. Mrs X complained the Council failed to complete a Care Act assessment in a timely manner. The Council’s records show a request for a Care Act assessment was sent by email to the Council on 14 December 2023; this followed the recommendation made on 2 October 2023 that Mr Y would benefit from an assessment. Council records dated 15 January 2024 also acknowledge that a Care Act assessment was required, as well as a review of Mr Y’s direct payment.
46. The Council’s records indicate it carried out a Care Act assessment in July 2025, and that it subsequently produced a support plan for Mr Y. I acknowledge however that Mrs X says she did not receive this.
47. The time taken from the date of the request (14 December 2023) to the completion of the assessment (July 2025) is 19 months. This constitutes a significant delay in the assessment process and is fault by the Council.
48. The Council acknowledged this delay as part of its complaint response. However, the apology provided at that time does not fully address the injustice to Mrs X and Mr Y. Mrs X says Mr Y’s mental health deteriorated significantly during the period in question, and that he received no support following the cessation of his EHC Plan. Mrs X says Mr Y became virtually housebound and experienced suicidal ideation, and that she had to remain hyper-vigilant as a result. Mrs X says this in turn significantly impacted her own mental health and stress levels and led to her feeling that she was at breaking point.

The Council’s communication with Mrs X

49. Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide adequate communication and/or updates to her regarding the assessment process. In its complaint response, the Council acknowledged the “lack of clarity and follow-through caused uncertainty and added to your concerns”. It also acknowledged the “lack of engagement and documentation falls short of expected standards and represents a failure in communication and case management”.
50. Mrs X says the Council did not provide a copy of the care and support plan following the assessment in July 2025. The Council says it has no records to demonstrate it provided a copy of the care and support plan to Mrs X or Mr Y. It says whilst it cannot provide evidence to show the support plan was shared, it cannot definitively state it did not provide it.
51. I acknowledge the Council’s comments. However, I also acknowledge Mrs X’s explanation that she did not receive the care and support plan. As a result, and taking into account that the Council has no record to indicate it provided the support plan to Mrs X or Mr Y, (no case notes, emails or letters regarding this), I find that on the balance of probabilities, it is more likely than not the Council did not provide a copy of the care and support plan. Had the Council done so, it is more likely than not it would have some record to indicate it did so.
52. Whilst it is positive the Council itself identified the failures in its communication with Mrs X, the lack of clear communication regarding the Care Act assessment, including the apparent failure to provide the care and support plan is fault. This caused an injustice to Mrs X and Mr Y, namely avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty regarding the provision of support.

The Council’s complaint handling

53. Mrs X complained to the Council on 7 November 2024, and again on 23 May 2025. The Council responded on 18 February 2025 and 10 July 2025 respectively. On both occasions, the Council failed to respond to Mrs X’s complaints within 20 working days, as specified by its corporate complaints procedure.
54. I acknowledge the Council may have considered Mrs X’s complaints via the statutory adult complaints procedure. However, the Council did not specify this as part of its complaint response. In addition, if the Council followed this process, we would expect to see evidence it agreed a timescale for providing a complaint response and that it kept Mrs X informed about progress. I have seen no evidence to indicate the Council did this.
55. The delays in the Council’s complaint handling amounts to fault. IThe injustice to Mrs X is the time and trouble incurred in pursuing the complaint and the avoidable distress and frustration caused by the delay.

Service improvements

56. When someone has suffered an injustice, we try to put them back in the position they would have been had that error not occurred. Our focus is on restoring services that have been denied and taking practical steps to put things right. Where that is not possible, we will try to think of remedies that acknowledge the impact of the fault identified.
57. When we decide an organisation needs to learn from this fault to prevent likely injustice to others in the future from similar fault, we can recommend actions it needs to take. We call this a service improvement.
58. In its response to our enquiries, the Council says it has made several service improvements to prevent a recurrence of the issues identified. The Council says it has introduced a redesigned Adult Social Care “Front Door” model supported by an interim triage function to provide a single point of access for referrals. It says the strengthened triage arrangements have improved the flow of work, reducing duplication and supporting more effective assessment planning and prioritisation. The Council says it has also strengthened practice standards with managers providing oversight through supervision and case audits.

Back to top

Action

59. To address the injustice identified, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide apologies to Mrs X and Mr Y for the fault identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings;
2. Make a symbolic payment of £500 to Mr Y in recognition of the avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty, and
3. Make a further symbolic payment of £500 to Mrs X in recognition of the avoidable time and trouble and distress incurred by the delays in the assessment process and complaint handling.
60. The Council has also agreed to take the following additional action within two months of the final decision:
1. Complete a review of Mr Y’s care and support plan. Once completed, the Council should share the updated care and support plan with Mrs X and Mr Y;
2. If the Council has not already done so, consider whether to carry out a carer’s assessment for Mrs X to identify any level of need for support, and
3. Provide evidence of the implementation of the service improvements specified in the Council’s enquiry response (the Council’s service improvement plan, revised policy/process documents, staff guidance etc).
61. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

62. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above actions to remedy the injustice identified and I have therefore concluded my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman