Summary: Miss X complains on behalf of Mr Y that the Council did not deal properly with his adult social care, causing avoidable distress and loss of care. The Council is not at fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X complains on behalf of Mr Y that the Council did not deal properly with his adult social care because it decided to reduced Mr Y’s direct payments as his mother receives carer’s allowance.
2. Miss X says Mr Y suffered avoidable distress and loss of care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. 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

Law, guidance and policies

Assessment

8. 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.
9. 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.

Carer’s Assessment

10. Where somebody provides or intends to provide care for another adult and it appears the carer may have any needs for support, the council must carry out a carer’s assessment. A carer’s assessment must seek to find out not only the carer’s needs for support, but also the sustainability of the caring role itself. This includes the practical and emotional support the carer provides to the adult.
11. As part of the carer’s assessment, the council must consider the carer’s potential future needs for support. It must also consider whether the carer is, and will continue to be, able and willing to care for the adult needing care. (Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014)

Duty to Meet Needs

12. Section 18 of the Care Act 2014 requires Councils to meet an adult’s needs for care and support where they meet the eligibility criteria. This duty does not apply to needs that are being met by a carer.

Care Plan

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.

What happened?

14. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
15. Mr X was in receipt of social care support. He received direct payments in respect of identified social care needs. The Council reviewed Mr X’s needs in June 2024.
• It assessed that some of his needs were healthcare interventions and not social care needs. Mr X applied for NHS Continuing Heath Care (CHC), which was not granted.
• The Council also concluded that some of Mr X’s assessed needs were being met by his mother for which she was also receiving Carer’s Allowance.
16. The Council completed a review of Mr X’s needs in November 2024. This resulted in a reduction in the direct payment hours.
17. Mr X complained to the Council in March 2025 about changes to the direct payments. The Council responded in May 2025 and did not uphold his complaint.
18. Mr X made a second complaint to the Council in July 2025, again about the direct payments. The Council again did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.

Analysis

19. Paragraph 12 above makes clear the Council is not under an obligation to meet needs that are already being met by a carer. Mr X’s mother was clearly acting as his carer at the time. The Council was entitled to consider reducing Mr X’s direct payments because of this. This is not fault by the Council.
20. Mr X complained that his circumstances should be considered as exceptional, due to his religion and that he had previously been a victim of violent crime. He said he would like his mother to receive direct payments to complete his care needs rather than employing a care agency or a third-party personal assistant.
21. The Council’s complaint response said:
• “it is not clear why other family members could not help if his mother was to seek employment outside the home.”
• “the review indicates that rehabilitation should be the focus of support for [Mr X] with his mother being able to gradually withdraw from some of the care she had been providing in the past.”
22. I have seen case records for Mr X from the Council which show it held several conversations with Mr X’s mother in February 2025 and June 2025. These show:
• Mr X had developed a level of self sufficiency and independence and was able to do some tasks for himself.
• Mr X’s mother felt Mr X wanted her to just be there or to fetch things he was able to get himself.
• Mr X’s mother hoped that Mr X would begin to do more domestic and personal care tasks himself where able to.
23. The Council says it took this as evidence that some previously funded support needs no longer met Care Act eligibility thresholds and could reasonably be managed independently.
24. On the balance of probabilities, the Council properly considered what Mr X’s needs were. It considered who was meeting those needs at the time and how they might be met in the future.
25. I have seen evidence that Mr X’s direct payment was later increased following a further reassessment of his care and support needs, after his mother decided to return to full-time work and the Council accepted she could no longer provide the same level of informal support. This indicates that Mr X did not require his mother as an only option to meet his care and support needs.
26. On the balance of probabilities, the Council considered Mr X’s needs properly. It made a decision to reduce his direct payments that it was entitled to make under the circumstances. This is not fault by the Council.

Back to top

Decision

27. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman