Summary: Ms B complained that the Council delayed in assessing her mother’s, Mrs C’s, night-time care needs and arranging for appropriate care. This caused uncertainty and time and trouble to Ms B. The Council has agreed to pay Ms B £250.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains that Liverpool City Council (the Council) delayed between August and November 2019 in carrying out an assessment of her mother’s, (Mrs C’s) night-time care needs. The Council also failed to respond to numerous requests from Ms B during this period. Mrs C did not receive the night-time care she needed for at least six months as the Care Provider had no availability by the time the assessment was completed. Ms B has been caused significant time and trouble in pursuing this matter.

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. If we are satisfied with a council’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

4. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Ms B 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

5. Mrs C is elderly with a number of health conditions, including dementia. She lives at home and receives a package of care to assist with her personal care tasks. Her daughter, Ms B also provides some care.
6. In the past Mrs C had received some mobile night care visits, but Ms B cancelled these in April 2019 as she felt they were not meeting Mrs C’s needs.
7. On 25 July 2019 Ms B tried to contact Mrs C’s social worker (SW) by telephone to enquire about night-time care and support for Mrs C. She said while Mrs C had been in hospital a social worker mentioned a sleepover service. SW was not available so Ms B spoke to the duty service who advised her that they would pass on a message to SW but the Council did not contract ‘night sits’ anymore. Ms B said she wanted to speak to SW as soon as possible.
8. SW emailed Ms B on 30 July 2019 asking if Ms B wanted to start the mobile night service again for Mrs C. Ms B replied saying that the mobile night service had been ‘abysmal’ and she was asking about the sleepover service.
9. On 6 August 2019 SW emailed the care provider enquiring about the sleepover service saying she had no knowledge about it at all. The care provider responded the same day saying that she had not been party to the discussion about care for Mrs C, but her service did provide night sleeps. She said they were commissioned normally by the Council or the health service and would need an assessment.
10. SW replied saying she had never heard of them and asked the care provider to send more information including what kind of assessment was needed. There is no record that a response was received.
11. In November 2019 Ms B contacted the Council again to complain she had not received a response from SW regarding the night care service. The Council said SW would arrange a suitable time to carry out a review of Mrs C’s needs. The case notes say Ms B was looking for a mobile night service for Mrs C.
12. SW sent another email to the care provider enquiring about the sleep-in night service. She visited Mrs C and Ms B on 13 November 2019 to review Mrs C’s care needs. The case notes said Mrs C’s needs were greater in the evenings and she needed the mobile night service. The care act assessment document does not refer to night-time needs. The care and support plan recommended a continued care package of four calls per day.
13. The Council responded formally to the complaint on 15 November 2019. It apologised for the failure of SW to respond to Ms B regarding the night service. It says SW was waiting for a response from the care provider but acknowledged that she should have kept Ms B informed.
14. Ms B complained to the Ombudsman in late November 2019.
15. In early December, the Council tried to source an additional care call per night from two carers. In early January a care provider offered a call between 7 and 8am. As Mrs C already had a morning call at 8 am the proposed night call was not suitable. The Council continued searching throughout January and February 2020 for a night-time care call. On 28 February 2020 a provider offered a call around 7 am which SW accepted. Ms B accepted this on 11 March 2020.
16. On 23 March 2020 Ms B requested a temporary suspension of the mobile night service due to concerns around COVID19. The Council also had concerns around risk assessments and communication so suspended the service. At the end of June 2020 Ms B requested the mobile night service be reinstated. The night call started on 9 July 2020.
17. In January 2020 we decided to investigate the complaint. We then paused our casework activities due to COVID19, until the end of June 2020.

Analysis

18. When Ms B enquired about night-time care the Council failed to properly communicate to her that it usually only commissioned a mobile night service involving a 15-minute care call. The first duty worker did say the Council did not provide a night sit-in service, but Mrs C’s social worker added confusion by saying she had not heard of the service and would find out more. She then failed to make appropriate enquiries of her department to establish the true position. This was fault.
19. The Council accepts it should have done more to contact Ms B and explain the situation, but it does not consider this affected the care provided as it did not provide a night sit-in service.
20. I agree it is unlikely the sit-in service would have been provided but the Council should have assessed this aspect of Mrs C’s needs and made the appropriate recommendation for night-time care. Once Ms B made her enquiry, the Council should have acted more quickly and carried out the assessment sooner that November 2019.
21. It is difficult to say with certainty that the mobile night care call would have been provided sooner, given the negative views of Ms B in the summer of 2019 towards this care, the difficulties in sourcing a care provider and the advent of COVID19. However, the delay in properly responding to the query and reviewing Mrs C’s night-time care needs caused uncertainty and distress to Ms B and time and trouble in pursuing the complaint.

Agreed action

22. In recognition of the injustice caused to Ms B, I asked the Council, within one month of my final decision, to pay Ms B £250.
23. The Council has agreed to my recommendation.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I consider this is a proportionate way of putting right the injustice caused to Ms B by the fault and I have completed my investigation on this basis.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman