Summary: The Council was at fault for delay in carrying out an annual review of Mr S’s care and support plan. The Council should apologise and make a financial payment to remedy the distress this caused. The Council has offered to carry out an annual review which limits any further injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to consider his requests for respite for his adult son, Mr S, and has not done a financial assessment to address his concerns about the increasing costs of activities and transport. Mr X said this is causing the family emotional and financial distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We may investigate complaints from the person affected by the complaint issues, or from someone else if they have given their consent. If the person affected cannot give their consent, we may investigate a complaint from a person we decide is a suitable representative. (section 26A or 34C, Local Government Act 1974)
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 recommend 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. 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

The Care Act Assessment, Care Plan and review

7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.

What happened

11. I have summarised below the key events; this is not intended to be a detailed account.
12. The Council issued Mr S with a support plan in April 2024.
13. Mr X complained to the Council in early July 2025. There were three parts to his complaint. He complained the Council had failed to respond to his request for extra respite care for Mr S. He also complained about the increased cost of transport and day care provision.
14. The Council responded in late July 2025. It said it would complete Mr S’s review so it could address all three issues. It did not uphold the complaint as it said it would address the issues in the review.
15. Mr X complained to us in early November 2025.
16. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it allocated a social worker to Mr S to review his care and support package with the view to include respite and address the increased costs of day provision and transport costs. The Council said it tried to contact Mr X on several occasions to arrange a review. Mr X said he wanted to wait for the outcome of this investigation.

Analysis

17. Statutory guidance says councils should review plans at least every 12 months. Mr S’s care plan is dated April 2024. This means the Council should have done an annual review and updated the care plan by April 2025. It had not completed an annual review at the time Mr X complained to the Council in July 2025. This was a delay of around two/three months which was fault. This caused the family distress as they did not know what provisions the new care plan might contain and the financial implications of this, issues they were already concerned about.
18. In its complaint response in July 2025, the Council said it would complete an annual review and address the issues Mr X had raised and contacted Mr X to arrange the review. This limited any further injustice to Mr S and his family. This was a satisfactory response and is in line with our guidance on remedies.
19. The Councils complaint response did not uphold Mr X’s complaint, as it said it would address the issues in the annual review. Whilst the offer of an annual review was a satisfactory remedy, there was clearly delay in the process which the Council should have recognised and apologised for.

Back to top

Action

20. Within four weeks of the final decision, the Council should:
• apologise to Mr X for the delay in Mr S’s annual review and pay him £200 for the distress this caused.
• write to Mr X and offer to complete an annual review within four weeks.
21. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

22. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman