Summary: Ms D complained the Council failed to put in place a sufficient care and support package for her son (Mr X) and his carers lacked language and driving skills. She said, as a result Mr X, experienced frustration and a loss of care support. We found no fault in the process the Council follow to review and reassess Mr X’s care and support plan up to Autumn 2025. It therefore reached decisions it was entitled to make. Also, the Council did not commission the care agency, we therefore found no fault in the steps and offers it made to resolve issues with carers.

The complaint

1. Ms D complained on behalf of her son, Mr X, about the Council’s handling of his adult social care support. She said it:
• failed to put in place a sufficient care and support package which met his needs. She wanted Mr X to receive increased hourly paid care support so personal assistants could be used and additional night-time care support; and
• carers supporting Mr X were unable to communication properly with him or drive his car.
2. Ms D said, as a result, Mr X experienced distress and frustration as he did not have the level of independence, he wanted to receive care and socialise.

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. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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)
6. 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

7. I have investigated the Council’s handling of Mr X’s care and support arrangement from December 2024 to September 2025. Including how it considered Ms D’s requests for changes to the support available to Mr X.
8. I have not investigated:
• any concerns Ms D has about events which has occurred prior to December 2024, which includes any agreement a carer bank should be available to Mr X. This is because this happened more than 12 months before it was brought to our attention, and it was not agreed provision in the 2024 care and support plan; and
• events or issues which has happened after September 2025. This is because this was not part of the complaint Ms D brought to the Council’s attention. Such matters are therefore new, and the Council should have the opportunity to address or respond to these through its complaints process.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Ms D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Ms D and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Care Act assessments

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. 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.
12. 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 and support plans

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.

Reviews

14. 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.

Personal Budgets

15. Everyone whose needs the council meets must receive a personal budget as part of the care and support plan. The personal budget gives the person clear information about the money allocated to meet the needs identified in the assessment and recorded in the plan. The council should share an indicative amount with the person, and anybody else involved, at the start of care and support planning. It should confirm the final amount of the personal budget through this process. The detail of how the person will use their personal budget will be in the care and support plan. The personal budget must always be enough to meet the person’s care and support needs.
16. There are three main ways a personal budget can be administered:
• as a managed account held by the council with support provided in line with the person’s wishes;
• as a managed account held by a third party (often called an individual service fund or ISF) with support provided in line with the person’s wishes; or
• as a direct payment.

(Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

What happened

17. Mr X has been assessed by the Council to require 24-hour care support due to how his health conditions impacts him. It was found live-in care support by one carer with sleeping nights would meet his needs.
18. Mr X lives in adapted property with a sibling who also has a care and support plan. He has a live in carer and a Motability vehicle his carers can use to enable him to access the community. His sibling had a larger care package with waking night support.
19. In late 2023 a supported direct payment was arranged for Mr X. This meant the Council would manage the direct payment account set up for him. However, Mr X and Ms D could decide who should deliver the care support. A care agency was in place to provide Mr X’s support.
20. In late 2024 Ms D asked the Council to increase Mr X’s care and support package. She said he should have a higher hourly rate so he could recruit personal assistants and have waking night support.
21. The Council considered her request but found no evidence his needs had changed. It was satisfied his care and support plan met his assessed needs, including that the sleeping night support was appropriate.
22. Ms D again asked the Council to increase the care package Mr X received in February 2025, but this was not agreed.

Ms D’s complaint

23. In Summer 2025 Ms D complained to the Council with the help from an advocate. She said Mr X’s care and support package was not sufficient as:
• he required support from his sibling’s carer at times, if they were not living together this would not be possible;
• the package was not flexible enough to meet his preferences and late bedtime routine. If his sibling was away, he would have to adjust his routine to be able to receive support. She said the Council had previously agreed for a carer bank model which would enable him more flexibility in care arrangements. This had not been put in place; and
• some carers provided by Mr X’s care agency spoke poor English and were unable to drive. This caused risks and limited his ability to participate in the community or socialise.
24. Ms D asked the Council for a reassessment of Mr X’s care and support needs, and a care and support plan independent from his sibling.
25. The Council did not uphold Ms D’s complaint as it was satisfied his assessed care and support needs were met. It explained:
• Mr X’s care and support need had been assessed by an occupational therapist, and her request had been considered. It had found a single carer could meet his needs and his 24-hour live-in care support was adequate. However, a reassessment of Mr X was underway.
• Ms D could change the care agency if it was felt it did not offer enough flexibility to meet Mr X’s lifestyle and routines;
• it had brought Ms D’s concerns about carers lack of language and driving skills to the care agency’s attention. It offered to arrange a meeting with between the parties to seek a solution; and
• it would consider separating Mr X and his sibling’s care and support packages as part of the reassessment.
26. Ms D’s advocate raised further concerns to the Council. This included the Council had not explained why a carer bank was not available to Mr X, the existing arrangements were unsafe and not person-centred, and Mr X needs were not always met during nighttime. She also said changing the care agency would not resolve the concerns and questioned how the Council monitors the care agency.
27. In response the Council acknowledged the concerns which it would consider in the ongoing reassessment of Mr X, including care logs from the care provider and any information provided by Ms D. It also explained it had:
• addressed Ms D’s concerns to the care agency about individual carers, and a formal review of the provider by its commissioning team could be made if she wanted this. However, Mr X could use his direct payment for a different care agency or personal assistants; and
• not received any safeguarding concerns about Mr X.
28. The Council completed Mr X’s reassessment in September 2025. This again assessed Mr X to have eligible needs in all areas, but found his needs was being met with the existing arrangements. It considered the views it received from Mr X and Ms D, including care agency logs which showed his nighttime needs remained 1-2 times of need which was being provided by a live-in carer through the sleeping night arrangements.
29. Ms D asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint, as she remained of the view Mr X’s care and support needs were not properly met or flexible enough for his desired lifestyle.
30. Since Ms D’s complaint I understand the care agency has raised concerns about the care arrangements and it shared its intention to provide notice to end the agreement. This has since led to discussions between the parties, a reconsideration by the Council’s ASC panel, and an inclusion of waking night support in Mr X’s care plan following a new occupational therapist assessment in early 2026. Mr X continued to receive support from the care agency.

Analysis and findings

Mr X’s care and support plan

31. Mr X had a care and support plan in place in late 2024 which set out his eligible needs and the support he should receive to meet these needs.
32. I acknowledge Mr X and Ms D feels the existing arrangement through a live-in carer and sleeping night arrangements was not always meeting his needs. This was largely due to his wishes to have more flexibility with carer’s support, including more nighttime support which was not dependent on his sibling.
33. It was the Council’s duty to keep under review Mr X’s care and support plan, and act on request it received for changes to the arrangements in place. I have not found fault in how the Council considered Ms D’s requests for changes to Mr X’s care and support arrangements between December 2024 to Autumn 2025. In reaching my view I was conscious the Council:
• considered Ms D and Mr X’s views, including information from the care provider in late 2024. It found his assessed needs were being met through the existing arrangement, and asked for evidence of any needs which were not being met;
• discussed the request again in early 2025 with Ms D, but did not change its view;
• considered Ms D and Mr X’s continued wishes for a change to the arrangement in Summer 2025. It agreed to reassess his needs to decide if changes to the care and support arrangements were necessary; and
• completed its reassessment based on the information it received from Mr X, Ms D and the care provider in September 2025. It found the existing arrangement continued to meet his assessed needs.
34. I have not seen evidence the Council received any evidence to suggest Mr X’s eligible care needs were not being met. This included nighttime support, which based on the care agency logs at the time remained for 1-2 night support events. This was within the live-in care sleeping nights arrangements.
35. I acknowledge Mr X has routines and preferences for when he wakes up and goes to bed which makes it challenging for his live-in carers, and at times this has meant his siblings carer support has supported Mr X.
36. However, I have not found fault in how the Council has considered Mr X’s wishes or Ms D’s requests up to September 2025. The Council has taken these into account when it reviewed or reassessed the care arrangements. It therefore reached decisions it was entitled to make.
37. In addition, I understand Mr X’s sibling has similar or identical health conditions and needs to Mr X. However, each individual is assessed based on their own needs. I cannot consider the Council’s reasons for providing a different care and support package to his sibling.

Care agency issues

38. Mr X’s care and support plan sets out his personal budget. This is paid through a direct payment which the Council helps to manage. This means Mr X and Ms D can choose how to spend the personal budget on his care, including what care agency or personal assistants he has in place.
39. I have not found fault by the Council in how it handled Ms D’s concerns about the care agency staff. This is because it:
• was not the commissioning body for the care support Mr X receives. While it offers support to find care agencies and facilitates the payment arrangements of the care providers, it is therefore not responsible for the care agency’s actions;
• informed Ms D she could change the care agency if she was not happy with the service or flexibility the carers could provide. It also offered her to help find alternative care agencies to consider, or for the Council to arrange care support directly which would remove the supported direct payment; and
• brought Ms D’s concerns to the care agency’s attention to seek assurances its carer had sufficient language skills and were able to drive. It also offered to arrange a formal review of the care provider if this was requested or needed.
40. Based on the arrangements in place, this is what I would have expected the Council to do. I understand the care agency subsequently raised issues with the arrangements, and an Occupational therapist found additional nighttime needs for Mr X based on more recent care logs. However, I cannot consider this as part of this investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman