Summary: We have not investigated Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to cease payments to him as a ‘Shared Lives’ carer. This is because Mr X is subject to ongoing criminal proceedings and we consider the matters complained about are inextricably linked to those proceedings.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council ended Shared Lives contracts for three service users and removed them from his care due to a safeguarding allegation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
3. 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

4. I discussed the complaint with Mr X and his wife. I also considered any information they submitted.
5. I considered the complaint documents and made enquiries of the Council. I considered the Council’s response.
6. I consulted the LGSCO’s ‘Guidance on Jurisdiction’
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. At the time of the matters complained about Mr X was a carer for three vulnerable adults under the ‘Shared Lives’ scheme. Mr X had a contract with the Council and received monthly payments to facilitate the care.
9. The Council stopped Mr X’s payments when the adults moved to alternative placements. This happened following a safeguarding referral about an allegation of abuse made by one of the adults. The Council did not pay Mr X during the safeguarding investigation.
10. Mr X complains the Council did not act in accordance with the ‘Shared Lives’ guidance which he says is clear that carers should continue to receive payments for the whole duration of a safeguarding investigation.
11. The Council says it provided an appropriate period of notice, as per Mr X’s contract, and that it was entitled to end the payments when it moved all three adults to other placements.
12. The police have also investigated the allegation against Mr X. The Council has informed the LGSCO that Mr X was charged by the police and the case will go to a criminal trial in January 2023.
13. The LGSCO passed Mr X’s case for investigation because we considered the complaint about Mr X’s payments was separable from any criminal proceedings. However, after considering the complaint further, we decided it is not possible for the LGSCO to robustly consider whether the decision to stop payments was correct and in line with policy without also looking at the Council’s actions leading up to the removal of the three adults previously cared for by Mr X.
14. The Council relied on a contract term which it says it was entitled to use when it stopped paying Mr X. This is because the Council assessed the adults as either needing alternative placements based on their needs or based on their desire to move. For the LGSCO to decide whether the decision to stop Mr X’s payments was done properly and without fault we would need to look at the assessment of the adults and the safeguarding investigation. In our view, an investigation of those matters at this stage would potentially overlap and interfere with the criminal proceedings against Mr X.
15. We have therefore used our general discretion to discontinue our investigation into Mr X's complaint. However, Mr X is entitled to approach the LGSCO again once the court case and all criminal proceedings have concluded. We would then reassess Mr X’s complaint to decide if it is something the LGSCO could and should investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We have discontinued our investigation into Mr X’s complaint for the reasons explained in this statement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman