Summary: Ms F complained about how the Council dealt with her requests for adult social care support since summer 2023 and its charges for a respite placement. We did not find the Council at fault. It could only act and provide the support Ms F agreed to, and it was entitled to charge her for care costs she had received following the outcome of its financial assessment. Other parts of Ms F’s complaint were not investigated as these were late or related to a private family dispute.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms F, complained about how the Council dealt with her requests for adult social care support since Summer 2023. This included it had not supported her move to a care home, it had wrongly charged her for respite care in a care home, and the behaviour of a social worker.
2. Ms F also raised concerns about a family dispute relating to her father’s estate and a property and how family members had lied to a court during proceedings.
3. Ms F said, as a result, she experienced distress, had a loss of support to meet her care and support needs, and had a financial loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. 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

8. I have investigated Ms F’s complaint relating to:
• her care charges when she was placed in a care home for respite during a two-week period in Autumn 2023; and
• how the Council considered, assessed, and supported Ms F with her care and support needs in 2023 when she asked for support; and
• how it considered her complaint up to March 2024 when it provided its final complaint response.
9. I have not investigated Ms F’s concerns relating to her allegations around her parent’s will, the proceeds of previous property she lived in, or the behaviour or allegations against her by family members. This is because these matters are a private dispute which is not for the Council, nor the Ombudsman to consider. I also understand these matters has been considered by a court and occurred several years ago.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I have considered Ms F’s complaint and the Council’s responses, including the information Ms F and the Council provided to the Ombudsman.
11. Ms F 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

12. 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.
13. 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.
14. 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.

Charging and financial assessments

15. The Care Act 2014 (section 14 and 17) provides a legal framework for charging for care and support. It enables a council to decide whether to charge a person when it is arranging to meet their care and support needs, or a carer’s support needs. The charging rules for residential care are set out in the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and councils should have regard to the Care and Support Statutory Guidance.
16. When the Council arranges a care home placement, it must follow the regulations when undertaking a financial assessment to decide how much a person must pay towards the cost of their residential care.

Mental Capacity Act

17. 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.
18. 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.

What happened

19. Ms F lives in her own accommodation.
20. In Summer 2023 Ms F asked the Council to complete a Care Act assessment. She said she had mobility issues and felt unable to cope in her home. She said she wanted to be placed in a care home.
21. The Council acknowledged her request and arranged for her to be allocated a social worker. However, before the Council could complete an assessment, Ms F told the Council she had changed her mind and did not want the Council’s support. The Council told her if her circumstances changed, she could contact it again.
22. In August 2023 Ms F contacted the Council again. She made the same request for a Care Act assessment and wanted to be placed in a care home.
23. The Council allocated a social worker who visited Ms F to complete the assessment. When its social worker arrived, Ms F was in her car and felt unwell. She did not want to go into her home. With Ms F’s agreement the social worker inspected her home and found several hazards the flat posed to Ms F. This included fire safety concerns, a lack of cleanliness, hoarding, and resulting lack of access to toilet and washing facilities.
24. The Council agreed to arrange a short-term respite placement in a care home for Ms F. This was to enable her home to be made safe and cleaned. It explained the cost of the care placement would depend on a financial assessment which it would complete with her, but she was likely to have to contribute to the costs of her care.
25. Ms F moved into the care home the Council arranged for her, where she stayed for a short period. However, she decided to leave the care home and returned home. She declined help from the Council to arrange for her home to be cleaned and decluttered, but she did agree to a fire safety referral.
26. Shortly after, the Council completed its financial assessment of Ms F which included obtaining information from the Department for Work and Pensions regarding her income. It found Ms F was required to make a contribution toward the cost of the care home. It shared its assessment and an invoice for the care costs with her.
27. In late 2023 Ms F again asked the Council to complete a Care Act assessment and said she wanted to be placed in a care home.
28. The Council arranged for an assessment to be completed. However, Ms F was then admitted to hospital. The Council’s allocated social worker visited her in hospital to complete its Care Act assessment. However, Ms F declined the Council’s support and discharged herself from hospital.
29. Both the hospital and Council found Ms F had capacity to make decisions around her health and welfare.

Ms F’s complaints

30. The key points of Ms F’s complaints and the Council’s responses were:
• (Care costs) Ms F disputed the invoice she had received for the short-term respite placement in the care home. She said the Council should pay for her care as it had told her it would be free and had failed to discuss payment of the care home with her.

The Council found it had arranged Ms F’s emergency respite care with her agreement, and it explained such service was chargeable pending the outcome of its financial assessment. It had assessed this in a timely manner and shared the outcome with her. It found no evidence she had been told this would be free.

• (Care support) Ms F said the Council had not helped her for several years when she had asked for help and complained about its social workers behaviour;

The Council found it had attempted to support Ms F and complete Care Act assessments. However, she had discharged herself from the care home and hospital and declined its support. This included support to clear and declutter her home, arranging a handyman to do repairs, support to manage home conditions, and support from a third-party organisation.

It found no evidence its social workers had acted or communicated inappropriately with her.

• (Safeguarding) Ms F said reports of safeguarding concerns had not been responded to; and

The Council found two safeguarding concerns on Ms F’s file. However, these were in 2019 and 2021. The latest concern had been closed with her agreement. It had also made a referral for safeguarding in 2023, but realised Ms F’s concerns relating to her family members were historical. The concern was subsequently closed.

• (Family dispute) Ms F referred to the historical issues relating to family members and the private property dispute.

The Council told Ms F these concerns were historical and a private matter between Ms F and her family.

31. In response, the Council did not uphold Ms F’s complaint. It explained it had attempted to support her, but she had declined its support.
32. Ms F asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint.
33. Following the Council’s response to my enquiries, I understand there was a further safeguarding enquiry regarding Ms F in Autumn 2024 which was not progressed. There was also a further Care Act assessment which found her eligible for some support with care in her home.

Analysis and findings

Ms F’s care support

34. The evidence shows Ms F asked the Council for Care Act assessments and to be placed in a care home three times since Summer 2023.
35. I have not found fault in how the Council dealt with Ms F’s requests for care support. This is because:
• on each occasion the Council allocated a social worker and reached out to Ms F to complete its assessment to decide what, if any, support she was eligible for. However, Ms F either decided not to progress with the assessment or refused the support the Council offered.
• when Ms F agreed to be placed in the respite placement, it arranged this and attempted to put other support in place to ensure her accommodation was cleaned, decluttered and made safe for her return. However, Ms F left the care home and refused the majority of support the Council offered.
36. I was also conscious both the Council and the hospital had found Ms F had capacity to make decisions around her health and welfare. It could therefore not force her to accept its offers of support or made decisions she did not agree to, regardless of its view whether her own decisions were in her best interest.

Charges for the respite placement

37. I acknowledge Ms F feels she should receive free respite care from the Council when it agreed to place her in the care home on a short-term basis.
38. The Council’s records show its social worker informed Ms F it would need to carry out a financial assessment and she may need to contribute toward the costs. It subsequently carried out the financial assessment without unnecessary delay and shared the outcome with Ms F. This was that it would cover around half of the care costs and Ms F had to pay the remainder.
39. I have not found the Council at fault. This is because I have seen no evidence the Council told her the respite care would be free, and it did not cause delay in completing its financial assessment and sharing this with Ms F.

Social worker behaviour

40. I understand Ms F feels the Council’s social worker or social care staff acted inappropriately, which included laughing at her over the phone.
41. However, there is no evidence to confirm Ms F’s allegations, and I have not found evidence of such behaviour in its records or communication with her. I have therefore not found the Council at fault.

Safeguarding

42. I have found no fault in the Council’s handling of any safeguarding concerns. This is because the only concern relevant for my investigation was in late 2023. This related to the historical financial and property dispute between Ms F and her family. When the Council realised this was not an ongoing concern and related to historical matters, it correctly did not pursue this concern further.

Back to top

Final decision

43. I have completed my investigation with a finding of no fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman