Summary: Ms X complained on behalf of Ms Y. She complained the Council did not complete the actions from a previous Ombudsman investigation. We have discontinued our investigation because the Council has evidenced it completed the actions. The issue with this matter is the explanation and communication from the Council. This is outside the scope of the original investigation and the Council should have the opportunity to consider this complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained on behalf of Ms Y, who has complex additional needs. She complained:
• the Council failed to provide a suitable deafblind communicator for Ms Y,
• the social worker who completed Ms Y’s Care Act assessment in May 2023, did not have the relevant skills to assess a deafblind person,
• the Council did not notify Ms Y about the care charges, retrospectively applied charges and then took finances from her direct payment,
• the Council has not completed the financial assessment properly,
• Ms Y cannot contact her direct payment budget holder.
2. Ms X said Ms Y has reduced her care and support hours because of the issues with her assessment and costs.
3. We investigated Ms X’s complaint. We found fault with the Council and this caused Ms Y an injustice. The Council agreed actions to remedy this complaint.
4. The Council agreed to complete the following actions:
• Apologise to Ms Y for not ensuring an appropriately trained and experienced worker completed her assessment, not ensuring she had a deafblind communicator guide, not responding to Ms Y’s request for an advocate, not making suitable reasonable adjustments, poor complaint handling and company B’s service failure. This apology should be in accordance with the Ombudsman’s new guidance Making an effective apology.
• Pay Ms Y £300 as an acknowledgement of the time and trouble she has spent pursuing this complaint.
• Pay Ms Y £500 for the frustration identified in this case and the uncertainty about her assessment.
• Retrospectively complete a financial assessment, considering any Disability Related Expenditure (DRE) Ms Y evidences with appropriate support.
• Remind relevant staff of the importance of effective complaint handling.
• Remind relevant staff of the importance of the Council’s duties under the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments where necessary.
5. Ms X complained the Council had not completed these actions. We agreed to register a new complaint against the Council as Ms X raised concerns with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

7. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
8. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I read Ms X’s complaint and spoke to her about it on the phone.
10. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
11. Ms X 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

What happened after our decision on Ms X’s previous complaint

12. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
13. We issued our final decision in October 2024. The Council evidenced it apologised and made the financial payment in November 2024. The Council evidenced it issued guidance to staff on complaint handling and making reasonable adjustments four days later.
14. The Council completed the financial assessment in November 2024. Ms X confirmed the specialist social worker attended Ms Y’s home as well as the financial assessment team. Ms X raised concerns about the financial assessment and the communication from the Council. She said the Council had not explained what DRE it had allowed and why it had not allowed others.
15. Ms X was not satisfied with the Council’s actions following the Ombudsman’s decision in October 2024. Ms X would like the Council to complete the recommendations and clearly explain its decisions.

My findings

16. I am discontinuing my investigation. The Council has evidenced it completed the actions in the previous decision. The action Ms X challenges in this case is “retrospectively complete a financial assessment, considering any DRE Ms Y evidences with appropriate support”.
17. This action details the Council complete the assessment and consider the DRE’s. The Council has evidenced it has done this. The issue with this matter is the Council has not explained its decision and communication is an issue. This is outside the scope of our original investigation. The Council should have the opportunity to consider a complaint about this issue before any further Ombudsman consideration.

Back to top

Decision

I have discontinued my investigation because the matters complained about are outside the scope of the original complaint and the Council should have the opportunity to consider this matter.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman