Summary: Mr X, complains the Council is failing to meet his needs since changing his social worker, leaving him without the support he needs. He wants the Council to give him the same social worker as before. We have discontinued the investigation into this complaint, as we cannot deliver the outcome he is looking for.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council is failing to meet his needs since changing his social worker, leaving him without the support he needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• discussed the complaint with Mr X;
• considered the comments and documents the Council has provided; and
• invited comments on a draft of this statement from Mr X and the Council, for me to consider before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. In November 2022 Mr X’s District Council wrote to him following a series of reports of unreasonable behaviour towards Police call handlers, ambulance call handlers, other NHS staff and other professionals. It warned him that if he did not stop this unreasonable behaviour it would consider serving him with a Community Protection Order.
5. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman on 14 March. He said:
• the Council was using triggers to provoke him;
• it had never explained the decision to change his social worker in 2022;
• it had told him not to get in contact and refused to speak to him; and
• he wanted his original social worker to work with him again.
6. We decided not to investigate the complaint until the Council had responded to it via its complaints procedure. Towards the end of April the Council sent us its correspondence with Mr X, including its final response to his complaint.
7. The Council wrote to Mr X on 22 March 2023. It said:
• he had a history of not identifying himself, coupled with making physical threats and swearing at staff;
• this was not acceptable;
• he could only contact the Council electronically (e.g. via its website or by e-mail) or by post; and
• staff would not answer his telephone calls or would end them.
8. On 28 March the Council wrote to Mr X. It noted that on 20 February it had provided him with a self-assessment form which he completed with his advocate. He visited the Council on 28 February with his advocate to discuss the assessment with two social workers. As he refused to share information with them, they could not complete the assessment and ended the visit.
9. The Council noted it had arranged a telephone assessment for 10 March, but Mr X had not engaged with this either. As the social workers had felt intimidated by him, they ended the call.
10. During the following week Mr X made abusive calls to the Council which included threats to its staff. The Council no longer considered itself to be under a duty to Mr X, as he had refused to engage with the assessment. If Mr X changed his mind and wanted to engage with its services, it was willing to do so, but;
• he could only visit its office if he had an appointment;
• any appointment had to be made in writing;
• it would not respond to correspondence which was abusive, intimidating or harassing; and
• if he attended a pre-arranged meeting and was abusive, harassing or intimidating, he would be asked to leave.
11. When the Council replied to Mr X’s complaint on 29 March, it said:
• it would not reassign his original social worker to work with him;
• there was no evidence to support his allegations; and
• any contact from him needed to be in writing.
12. The Police arrested Mr X in May over his threats to Council officers. Mr X says they played recordings of the calls he made to the Council. He says he was shocked by the contents.
13. The Council has confirmed it is still open to Mr X to have an assessment of his needs on the terms set out in its letter of 28 March. It has also confirmed it will arrange advocacy to support Mr X with an assessment.

Are there grounds to continue the investigation into Mr X’s complaint?

14. We cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants, the return of his original social worker. It is for the Council to decide what work officers should do. It is not for me to tell the Council who to assign to individual cases. Nor is there anything else we could achieve by investigating Mr X’s complaint further. The Council has explained the terms under which it will complete an assessment of his needs. It is for Mr X to decide whether to comply with those terms.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have discontinued my investigation on the basis we cannot deliver the outcome Mr X is looking for.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman