Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s reduction of an adult social care personal budget. The Council followed a proper process of assessment, completed by a suitable member of staff, to decide how to meet the complainant's needs. There is not enough evidence of fault, and no reason for the Ombudsman to question or criticise the Council’s decision, even though the complainant strongly disagrees with it.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Council has wrongly reduced her personal budget for adult social care support. This is causing significant distress and anxiety.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council is responsible to meet Ms B’s adult social care needs. It does so by providing her with direct payments which Ms B uses to employ personal assistants.
7. Last year the Council reassessed Ms B’s needs and reduced her personal budget by a large amount. Ms B says the support plan no longer meets her needs.
8. A suitably qualified member of staff carried out an assessment of Ms B’s care and support needs over two visits, and taking account of Ms B’s views. The Council has offered further assessments by occupational therapists and reablement, but Ms B has declined. Ms B strongly disagrees with the outcome of the assessment, but there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s process, and so the Ombudsman cannot question the outcome.
9. The Council also allowed sufficient time before reducing the package to allow Ms B to resolve her employment responsibilities and completed a review of the new package of care.
10. The Council thoroughly investigated and responded to Ms B’s complaint, and it is unlikely we could add to that or reach a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault. The Council’s process to assess Ms B’s needs was correct so we cannot challenge the outcome even though Ms B disagrees with it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman