Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council has supported her care and support needs since March 2024. We find no fault in the care agencies arranged by the Council or in the timeliness of the information provided to Miss X. However, we do find fault in the delay in completing her care and support assessment. This delay caused Miss X avoidable distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and complete the outstanding assessment.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council has supported her since March 2024. Specifically:
1. the care agencies arranged by the Council have been unsuitable;
2. the Council has not carried out a new care assessment; despite saying it would do so in July 2024;
3. there was a delay in providing her with information about Care Phone; and
4. a previous care provider arranged by the Council caused damage to her property.
2. As a result, Miss X says she has been without the care support she needs since August 2024.

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 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)
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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I am not investigating part d) of Miss X’s complaint. This concerns damage to her microwave, which she says was caused by a carer from a previous care provider commissioned by the Council. This is a claim for property damage, which should be pursued directly with the Council as a request for compensation through its insurance process. If the Council refuses to consider or uphold that request, Miss X can take the matter to the small claims court. It is reasonable to expect her to use these alternative routes, so I am not investigating this part of her complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Community care 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. 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.

Direct payments

10. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for them to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They enable people to arrange their own care and support to meet those needs. The council must ensure people have relevant and timely information about direct payments so they can decide whether to request them. If they do so, the council should support them to use and manage the payment properly.

What happened

11. In 2024, following a stay in hospital, the Council arranged for a care agency (provider 1) to support Miss X.
12. In May, Miss X raised concerns to the Council about the quality of care she was receiving from provider 1. She later made a formal complaint, as she felt the issues she raised were not being resolved.
13. In June, the Council discussed the concerns with Miss X and arranged for a new care agency (provider 2) to take over the care package.
14. In July, Miss X contacted the Council with concerns about provider 2. She expressed that she did not want certain care workers to attend to her. While she did not wish to make a further formal complaint, she asked for the issues to be addressed.
15. Later that month, the Council gave Miss X a verbal complaint response. It confirmed provider 2 had since been arranged and encouraged her to build relationships with care workers. The Council also agreed that her allocated social worker would complete an updated care and support plan. Miss X asked not to receive a written complaint response due to data protection concerns.
16. A week later, 2 weeks after beginning the care, provider 2 ended its support with immediate effect, citing concerns about Miss X’s behaviour. The Council promptly began sourcing a new care agency.
17. In August, the Council secured providers 3 and 4 to jointly deliver care. However, following contact with provider 3, Miss X declined its support. She also did not respond to provider 4’s attempts to arrange a start date.
18. Later that month, the Council met with Miss X, agreed to change her allocated social worker, and continued efforts to secure a care agency.
19. In October, the Council met with Miss X and her advocate. It agreed that Miss X could suggest agencies she would be willing to receive support from, and the Council would contact them directly. Miss X first proposed provider 5, but they had no availability at the time. She later suggested provider 6, who initially had capacity but declined the care package after an initial conversation with Miss X.
20. Later that month, the Council sent Miss X a written response to her June complaint to allow her to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman. It detailed the verbal complaint response from July and acknowledged the ongoing difficulties finding an agency that met Miss X’s needs and expectations and confirmed continued efforts to source support.
21. In November, the Council continued its efforts to find a suitable care agency. It re-circulated Miss X’s care package to all providers and explored alternative options, including direct payments or privately arranged care. However, as Miss X declined to complete a financial assessment, direct payments could not be pursued. The Council continued to provide her with regular updates. Miss X suggested providers 7 and 8, but neither had capacity. The Council then proposed provider 9, who had availability. However, after several unsuccessful attempts to contact Miss X, the provider visited her home but was turned away.
22. In December, the Council met with Miss X again. It provided information about Care Phone services, said it could re-approach provider 5 if she wished, and reiterated that the only alternative to a Council-brokered service was a direct payment, which required a financial assessment. It also offered another agency (provider 10).
23. Miss X declined provider 10 due to previous concerns. She raised complaints about agencies not responding to her, listed several providers she was unwilling to accept, and said she did not trust provider 5 as it was a relatively new agency. She also asked to be put in contact with the Council’s data protection officer to discuss financial assessments.
24. Later that month, the Council issued its final complaint response after Miss X escalated her complaint to the Ombudsman. It confirmed that a new social worker had been allocated, information on Care Phone had been provided, direct payments had been discussed, and it had offered further meetings with Miss X and her advocate to explore options.
25. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it had been trying to complete a new care assessment since October 2024, but Miss X had not responded to information requests. In May 2025, it scheduled a care assessment to review her needs and consider possible occupational therapy support. Miss X cancelled this visit. The Council said it is continuing to try to arrange a new visit but has so far been unsuccessful.
26. The Council also confirmed Miss X first asked about a Care Phone during the December meeting. It provided the requested information and asked for her consent to proceed, but Miss X declined. In May 2025, she told the Council she wanted more time to consider whether to proceed with the Care Phone.

My findings

Care and support

27. Miss X has been assessed as having eligible care and support needs. Since provider 2 ended its support in July 2024, she has been without the care she requires. The Council responded promptly when providers withdrew and made sustained efforts to source alternative support. It contacted all contracted providers on multiple occasions and regularly updated Miss X on its progress. All providers approached were commissioned and registered with the CQC.
28. The Council involved Miss X in the process, giving her opportunities to express preferences, speak directly with agencies before accepting care, and suggest providers for the Council to contact.
29. However, Miss X declined support from providers who had availability and were willing to meet her needs, often for reasons that were not related to the quality or suitability of care. For example, concerns about the provider’s registration history or how long they had been in operation. While it is understandable that Miss X wants to ensure her care is suitable, these reasons were not always reasonable or directly linked to whether the provider could meet her assessed needs.
30. The Council continued to make adjustments, re-broker packages, and approach specific providers at Miss X’s request. It also explored alternative options, such as direct payments, which Miss X chose not to pursue. I am satisfied the Council took appropriate and reasonable steps to meet its duties. I find no fault in its actions or how it has supported Miss X in trying to source a care agency.

Assessment

31. In July 2024, the Council told Miss X that an updated care and support assessment would be completed. However, this did not take place. The Council says it began trying to arrange an assessment from October 2024, but no assessment has yet been completed. A visit was arranged for May 2025 but Miss X later cancelled this. No new date has yet been agreed.
32. Care and support plans should be reviewed at least every 12 months. Miss X’s last review took place in late 2023. The delay in progressing the assessment is fault and has caused avoidable distress and uncertainty for Miss X.

Care phone

33. Miss X first requested information about a Care Phone in December 2024. The Council responded promptly, providing cost details and requesting her consent to proceed. Miss X declined at the time and later said she needed more time to consider. The Council has continued to keep this option open. I find no fault in the Council’s actions in relation to Care Phone.

Back to top

Action

34. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within four weeks of the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology.
35. Within two months of the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to complete a care and support assessment for Miss X. The Council should consider Miss X’s request for the assessment to be carried out by alternative means and make reasonable efforts to accommodate this. If completion of the assessment is delayed for any reason, the Council should keep clear records of the efforts it made to arrange and complete the assessment.
36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman