Summary: Ms X complains for Ms Y the Council failed to provide Ms Y with adequate care and support and to secure and store her possessions while she lived in two care placements. We have found no evidence of fault by the Council in the care and support Ms Y received. We found fault as the Council failed to ensure Ms Y’s belongings were adequately stored. The Council has accepted it was at fault. It has already agreed to apologise to Ms Y, offered a compensation payment to Ms Y and a payment in recognition of the distress caused. So, we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains for Ms Y the Council failed to provide adequate care and support to Ms Y while she lived in a care home and hostel. Ms X also complains the Council failed to adequately secure and store Ms Y’s possessions causing distress and financial loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. 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 could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 read the papers submitted by Ms X and spoken to both Ms X and Ms Y about the complaint. I considered the Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting documents it provided.
5. Ms X, Ms Y 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

6. Ms Y is a young adult and a former child in care. In October 2018 Ms Y went into hospital because of mental and physical health needs and now uses a wheelchair because of her physical health. The Council received a referral for Ms Y to carry out a Care Act assessment as she needed accommodation before being discharged from hospital. The Council carried out an assessment which confirmed Ms Y had eligible care and support needs and needed a residential placement. The Council considered Ms Y had capacity to decide where she wanted to stay. Council documents report Ms Y was unsure whether to remain in Bristol or move away from the area for a fresh start. The Council drew up a support plan.
7. In March 2019 Ms Y was discharged from hospital to a residential care home out of the Council’s area because no local residential or supported living accommodation could meet her needs. I shall refer to the care home as Care Home B. A social worker carried out a formal placement and support plan review of Ms Y in April 2019. Council records note Ms Y was ‘mostly settled’ with some periods of frustration and aggression towards staff. The social worker noted Ms Y was positive about the placement but felt some staff were unsupportive.
8. Care Home B raised some issues with the Council in May 2019 about Ms Y’s behaviour and reported Ms Y wanted to return to Bristol. The Council agreed to identify alternative supported living placements in Bristol and tried for several months, but no providers made a bid to offer Ms Y a placement.
9. The Council supported Ms Y on a visit to see her family in Bristol in July 2019. The Council arrange viewings of flats for Ms Y in October and November 2019 but found both unsuitable due to access issues for Ms Y.
10. Ms Y was awarded a Personal Independence Payment (PIP) payment of £1700 in October 2019. PIP is an allowance from the government to help towards extra costs if a person has a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability. Ms Y told a social worker she owed Care Home B £1300 of her payment as it had lent her money while she was waiting for her PIP application to be decided.
11. Care Home B raised concerns about Ms Y due to her escalating behaviour. The Council reviewed Ms Y’s placement in January 2020 and identified a step-down facility I shall refer to as Hostel C in the same area as Care Home B. The Council told Ms Y it would take some time to find her a placement in Bristol.
12. Ms Y moved into a self-contained wheelchair accessible flat at Hostel C a few weeks later with staff available to provide support day and night. Ms Y also received one to one support each day funded by the Council with a dedicated support worker during the night if needed. A Council social worker reviewed Ms Y’s placement in March 2020. The review noted Ms Y’s wheelchair use fluctuated and she needed support to make health appointments as she had a history of turning them down. The review noted Ms Y’s mental health was better, but she declined to clean her flat and to bathe and shower regularly. It noted Ms Y was managing her own finances well.
13. Ms Y‘s placement with Hostel C began to break down in March 2020 at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. Ms Y complained about lack of support. The Council’s documents show Ms Y’s mental health declined in April 2020 and it tried to find another placement for her as Hostel C said it would be serving notice on the placement. Ms Y was admitted to hospital because of her mental health needs.
14. The Council tried to find suitable accommodation for Ms Y but found no vacancies. Hostel C served notice on the placement saying it could no longer continue to meet Ms Y’s needs and she impacted on other hostel members. Hostel C agreed to pack up Ms Y’s belongings and store them awaiting collection. It noted Ms Y’s belongings were a small three drawer unit, a TV and TV cabinet and some boxes and bags of clothes.
15. In May 2020, the Council found a possible placement for Ms Y out of the area again. Ms Y was unhappy at the proposal and wanted to move in with a member of her family. Ms Y discharged herself from hospital in May 2020 to move in with her friend Ms X. The Council says the move took place before a social worker could identify and arrange follow up care for Ms Y.
16. A social worker made telephone calls about Ms Y’s belongings at Hostel C and tried to arrange for Ms Y to collect them. The social worker offered to pay her mileage costs so she could collect the items, but Ms Y rejected the proposal. The social worker obtained quotes from taxi companies to collect the items. The Council’s documents noted Ms Y’s TV was being kept inside Hostel C.
17. The Council updated Ms Y’s care plan and gained funding to support her for 15 hours a week. In July 2020, the Council obtained a quote from a taxi company to collect Ms Y’s belongings and bring them to Bristol. Ms X and Ms Y would then transfer the items to Ms X’s car before travelling on to Ms X’s home.
18. The taxi company contacted the social worker after collecting Ms Y’s belongings and travelling to Bristol. The taxi driver said Hostel C stored Ms Y’s belongings in a damp cellar, and they were damaged with the clothes mouldy, smelly, and damp. The taxi driver said Ms X refused to place the items in her car and asked him to dispose of them. Ms X and Ms Y agreed to catalogue the affected items.
19. Ms X contacted the social worker about Ms Y’s belongings saying the Council was responsible as it had a duty of care towards Ms Y’s possessions. The social worker apologised for the situation and distress caused to Ms Y. The social worker said he was unaware Hostel C was storing the belongings in such poor circumstances and advised Ms X and Ms Y to list out all the damaged/ruined items.
20. In July 2020 Ms Y was admitted to hospital again for a short stay and the Council arranged for a domiciliary care provider to support her when she returned to Ms X’s home.

Ms Y’s complaint to the Council

21. Ms X complained to the Council on Ms Y’s behalf about the lack of support given to Ms Y at Care Home B and Hostel C. Ms X said, Care Home B left Ms Y without help to wash or change dirty or wet clothes, did not get her to a GP or make sure she had the correct medication. Ms X said Ms Y was left without help with her finances.
22. Ms X also complained about the loss of Ms Y’s possessions. The Council asked Ms X to provide photographs and a list of the damaged items estimating their value and a possible compensation figure.
23. Ms X sent the Council a few photographs and short video of the items. Ms X said Ms Y said the items were clothing, pictures, portraits, ornaments, and gifts. It included a wooden TV unit, sun lounger and makeup and make up box. Ms Y said some items had sentimental value, were irreplaceable and she was distressed by their loss. Ms X asked the Council for £3000 in compensation.

The Council’s response to Ms Y’s complaints

24. The Council considered Ms X’s complaint and the evidence provided. It accepted it had responsibility to take reasonable steps to safely store Ms Y’s belongings while she was in hospital. The Council said the social worker accepted Hostel C’s offer to store the items in good faith assuming they would be stored properly. The Council accepted that unfortunately, the goods were left in unregulated storage after May 2020. It noted a social worker offered Ms Y a mileage allowance to collect the goods herself, but she had declined the offer so delaying their collection.
25. The Council noted Ms Y could recover a TV and some personal items including photographs and documents before asking for the taxi driver to dispose of the rest. The Council said Ms X and Ms Y were responsible for asking the taxi driver to dispose of the remaining items when they arrived in Bristol. And they did not catalogue the damaged items despite being clearly advised to do so by the social worker. The Council considered the photographs submitted by Ms X were poor quality and the video blurred so it was difficult to prove the value of the damaged goods.
26. The Council agreed to pay Ms Y compensation but said based on the evidence provided so far it could not agree to £3000. The Council apologised to Ms Y and offered her £998 compensation including a £250 payment for her distress. The Council said it based its offer on our guidance on remedies and distress payments and it noted Ms Y recovered some items. The Council confirmed its willingness to reconsider the compensation amount if Ms Y provided clear evidence about the value of the damaged goods.
27. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaints about a lack of support to Ms Y while she was at Care Home B and Hostel C. The Council said staff at Care Home B helped Ms Y apply for PIP and made sure she had funds by lending her money while her application was being considered. Ms Y had capacity to manage her finances and was aware it was a loan to be repaid once she received her PIP.
28. The Council confirmed Care Home B made sure Ms Y was registered with a GP even though Ms Y refused to attend appointments. The Council noted some difficulties in getting a medical prescription for Ms Y when she first went to the care home, but this was quickly resolved. The Council confirmed staff at Care Home B helped Ms Y with her medication.
29. The Council said social workers visited Ms Y at her placement at Care Home B to review and reassess her needs. The social workers also made telephone calls to Ms Y and the care provider at other times. Staff at Care Home B were concerned about Ms Y’s refusal to receive help and support around personal care and laundry. And she received one to one support to offer a prompt and support on these matters. The Council accepted Ms Y had a difficult relationship with staff at Care Home B and she made complaints while there which were not upheld.
30. The Council confirms social workers also visited Ms Y at Hostel C to review her placement. The social worker also contacted staff at Hostel C at other times about the placement. The Council confirms Ms Y’s care notes show she was receiving suitable medication while at Hostel C. The Council considers that it ensured Ms Y received appropriate support while at Care Home B and Hostel C.
31. In response to my enquiries the Council accepted it did not fully consider the impact of the loss of items on Ms Y as a former child in care. Because of this I asked the Council to reconsider its offer. The Council has done so and offered Ms Y an extra £250 payment to recognise the additional distress caused to her. This means the Council’s compensation offer to Ms Y is £1248.
32. The Council confirms that when Ms Y moved in with Ms X the Council was looking to find supported accommodation for her. Once Ms Y moved to live with Ms X the Council sourced community support services to provide her with care and support. Ms X has moved from Ms X’s home and currently living in other accommodation.

My assessment

33. The documents provided by the Council show the social workers were kept updated regularly about Ms Y’s placement at Care Home B and Hostel C. The evidence shows the social workers also visited Ms Y at the placements to carry out reviews and there was contact between the social workers, Ms Y, and staff at both placements. The Council accepts there were a few issues when Ms Y first moved to Care Home B, but these were quickly resolved with Ms Y saying she was settled at the placement. Staff at Care Home B raised concerns about Ms Y’s behaviour as she would not accept care and support. But Ms Y had one to one support available to her while she was living there. There is no evidence of fault by the Council regarding the care and support Ms Y received while at the care placements.
34. The Council accepts it was at fault and responsible for the storage of her belongings while at Hostel C. It has apologised as it was unaware of the storage conditions and offered Ms Y £1248 in compensation. This consists of £500 for the distress caused to Ms Y and £778 in compensation for the damaged items. The Council based its offer for distress on our guidance on remedies. It is above the usual payment we would recommend showing the Council recognises the severe distress caused to Ms Y from the loss of some of her belongings. Because of this I do not consider I can achieve anything further for Ms Y. Or that any further investigation will lead to a different outcome for Ms Y.
35. The Council has offered Ms Y compensation for the damaged items and advised Ms Y it will reconsider the amount if she can provide further evidence of the value of the items. It is for the Council to decide on the compensation to offer Ms Y and so I do not consider I can achieve anything further for her. It is for Ms Y to provide more evidence of the value of the damaged items should she wish the Council to reconsider its offer.

Back to top

Final decision

36. I am completing my investigation. I have found no evidence the Council failed to ensure Ms Y received adequate care and support while she was in a care placement. The Council was at fault as it failed to adequately secure and store Ms Y’s possessions causing distress and financial loss. The Council has offered a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman