Summary: Ms B complains about the Council’s decision that she is not eligible for support from its Community Learning Disabilities Service. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and it is unlikely an investigation will lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms B, says the Council has used insufficient evidence to conclude she is no longer entitled to support from its Community Learning Disabilities Service (CLDS) which she has received for over 15 years. This has caused Ms B stress and anxiety and she is worried about receiving help in the future.

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 cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Ms B’s representative and the Council. I gave the representative the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered the additional information he sent .

Back to top

What I found

5. For over 15 years, and since she was a young person, Ms B received support from CLDS as she had been diagnosed with a learning disability.
6. Recently, the Council reassessed Ms B and decided she did not meet the criteria for a diagnosis of a learning disability and so is no longer eligible for support from CLDS.
7. Realising the impact such a decision would have on Ms B, the CLDS consultant nurse and senior support worker met Ms B at her home to explain its assessment and decision. At this meeting the workers explained why Ms B had been treated in the past as having a learning disability and why its decision had changed.
8. In responding to Ms B’s complaint about its decision, the Council reviewed her case but did not uphold her complaint. It confirmed she was no longer eligible for support from CLDS and gave her details of where to seek help with her correspondence.
9. In responding to the Ombudsman, the Council has confirmed it will look into Ms B’s request for social care input from CLDS or as a handover to its Adult Social Care Team.

Assessment

10. The Ombudsman cannot review the merits of decisions properly taken by local authorities and I have seen no evidence that there was fault in the way the Council came to its decision or dealt with matters.
11. It reassessed Ms B and came to its decision using a variety of evidence and, realising the impact it could have on her, officers met with her in person to explain the Council’s decision.
12. In responding to my draft decision, Ms B’s representative has provided a copy of a recent letter from Ms B’s GP which confirms Ms B is on their learning disability register and requires ongoing learning disability support. It is open to Ms B to send a copy of this letter to the Council so it can assess it and decide on an appropriate response. The decision as to Ms B’s eligibility for CLDS support is for the Council to make.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and it is unlikely an investigation will lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman