Summary: Miss X complained about delays and poor communication from the Council when repairing and replacing equipment it provided to meet her care and support needs. There was fault in how the Council’s community equipment service took too long to replace and repair community equipment it had provided to Miss X. It also failed to properly communicate with Miss X or to take a proactive approach when the delays became prolonged. The Council agreed to pay Miss X the financial remedy is had already offered and apologise further for the extra injustice we have found. It also agreed to review its equipment service’s and supplier’s procedures.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about delays and poor communication when the Council’s supplier arranged, in 2023, for repair and replacement of specialist equipment she needs because of her disability. She also says the Council did not make its complaints system easy for her to access and failed to acknowledge that she resolved one of the issues herself. As a result, Miss X says she was caused significant distress, upset, inconvenience and anxiety and was made to feel like she was a burden. She wants the Council to give her a genuine apology and make improvements so that similar things do not happen to her or others in the future.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered:
• the information Miss X provided;
• the Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided; and
• relevant law and guidance.
6. Miss X and the Council have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Equipment to meet care and support needs

7. Councils have a duty to meet eligible care and support needs. One way a council can do this is by providing community equipment, aids, or adaptations.
8. In the Council’s area, its community equipment service is provided by a separate organisation on the Council’s behalf. I have referred to this below as the ‘equipment service'. Where equipment is needed, the Council sources this from a separate supplier, who is also responsible for maintenance. I have referred to this organisation as the ‘equipment supplier’. The Council’s community occupational therapy (OT) service is also provided by a separate organisation, commissioned by the Council.
9. As much as practicable, councils must involve individuals in the planning of how their care and support needs will be met. It must also promote the person’s well-being, which includes their emotional well-being, and control over their day-to-day life (including their care and support, and how this is provided). Councils must have particular regard to:
• the importance of beginning with the assumption that a person is best-placed to judge their well-being;
• a person’s views, wishes, feelings and beliefs; and
• the need to ensure that decisions about the person are made having regard to all the individual's circumstances.
10. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance emphasises that, when planning to meet someone’s needs, councils should provide meaningful choices where possible.

Background

11. Miss X has care and support needs, some of which are met by the Council by providing equipment, including an adjustable bed and shower chair.
12. In early 2023, a relative of Miss X contacted the Council’s equipment supplier, on Miss X’s behalf, to ask about replacement parts for the adjustable bed. The equipment supplier referred Miss X to the Council’s occupational therapy service as there was some confusion about what the process was for ordering the replacements.
13. In late January and throughout February 2023, the equipment service tried to locate the serial or model numbers for the bed Miss X currently had. This ended with the equipment supplier visiting Miss X’s home, at which time a technician advised that the bed should be replaced.
14. Between March and May 2023, the equipment service contacted the manufacturer of Miss X’s current bed to ask about equivalent replacements. At times it shared information with Miss X but there were periods of several weeks when there were no contact from the Council. On at least two occasions, Miss X’s relative contacted the Council asking for updates. The manufacturer visited Miss X at home in early June 2023 to advise on a suitable replacement.
15. In mid-June 2023, Miss X also contacted the Council’s equipment supplier about her shower chair which either needed repairs or replacement. The equipment supplier asked the Council whether it could provide a temporary replacement while it carried out repairs.
16. Due to errors by the equipment supplier, photographs taken of the shower chair were not shared with the person responsible for arranging the repair. The equipment supplier then failed to realise the repair was outstanding, until Miss X complained about this in August 2023. Around this time the repair was completed at Miss X’s home, without the need for a temporary replacement.
17. A replacement bed was delivered to Miss X in mid-August 2023. However, the size was not as Miss X had expected. Miss X contacted the Council’s equipment service, who contacted the manufacturer who advised either a difference mattress, or a different model of replacement bed. Miss X suggested a different supplier which the equipment service contacted for more details.
18. The Council’s equipment service checked the mattresses available would be suitable for Miss X’s needs and arranged a trial. Miss X then asked for a smaller bed, as the trial one was too large. The Council’s equipment service arranged for a smaller bed and mattress, which were delivered in early October 2023.

The Council’s response to Miss X’s complaint

19. The Council’s equipment service responded to Miss X’s complaint about the replacement of her bed and repairs to the shower chair on behalf of the Council. In its final response in January 2024, the equipment service accepted:
• there had been delays in repairing the shower chair because of failures in the equipment supplier’s processes;
• there had been avoidable delays in replacing Miss X’s bed;
• its communication with Miss X about the replacement of her bed was not as good as it should have been and they should have kept Miss X updated more often; and
• while it had not intended for Miss X to feel that her social needs and preferences were less important, that its staff may have given Miss X that impression.
20. The equipment service also explained that the Council had accepted that its communication with Miss X about the complaints process had not been clear or timely.
21. The equipment service told Miss X that both it and the equipment supplier had learned from Miss X’s complaint and made changes to its procedures to prevent similar delays happening in future. However, it did not provide details of what these changes were in its response to Miss X.
22. The equipment service apologised to Miss X for the distress the delays and poor communication had caused and paid her £400 to recognise that distress.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

23. In response to my enquiries, the Council explained it had:
• introduced a new process for advising on replacement equipment. It said that, in future, replacement requests would be referred back to the original clinical team, rather than referring for new assessments; and
• recruited to vacancies in its complaints team and started work to develop a new process for allocating social care complaints.
24. It also explained that annual checks of specialist equipment would allow it to identify future repairs so that parts could be ordered in advance.

My findings

25. The Council, its equipment service and equipment supplier have accepted there were fault in how they arranged replacement of Miss X’s bed and repairs of her shower chair. However, I consider there was further fault beyond that already accepted by the Council.
26. In early 2023 there were delays caused by both a lack of information about Miss X’s existing bed and confusion about the process for ordering replacement parts. The latter issue has likely been addressed by the Council’s changes to referrals for advice about replacement equipment. However, had the Council’s equipment supplier kept better records about the equipment it had provided, this would have prevented the delays in checking the model and serial numbers. I consider the failure to keep those records was fault which led to part of the delay in replacing Miss X’s bed.
27. I do not consider there was any fault in how the Council’s equipment service first approached Miss X’s request for replacement parts for her bed or how it first tried to find a like-for-like replacement. However, when it became clear this was not an option, the equipment service missed opportunities to take decisive action to resolve the problem. For example, the equipment service should have considered meeting with Miss X to fully understand her needs and wishes, rather than waiting for contact from her or her relative. As the replacement process went on, it should have become more obvious that a different approach was needed. Overall, my view is the equipment service took a reactive, rather than proactive approach to the replacement and there was a lack of coordination and oversight. That was fault which added to the initial delays.
28. When meeting assessed needs under the Care Act, the Council, and those acting on its behalf, must promote choice and involvement in care and support planning. This extends to providing equipment to meet someone’s needs. When first replacing Miss X’s bed, I am not satisfied the equipment service made sufficient efforts to give Miss X a meaningful choice. Although it did ask a different manufacturer about a possible trial early on, it did not tell Miss X about this or explore alternatives when that manufacturer could not help. Miss X only had the choice of one manufacturer, until she suggested a second when the first replacement bed was not suitable. Combined with the lack of oversight or a proactive approach, this further added to the delays and Miss X’s distress.
29. The Council has apologised for some of the distress it caused Miss X and has paid her £400 as a symbolic payment. While the Council should apologise further for the impact of the further fault I have outlined, I am satisfied that the financial remedy the Council has paid if suitable to recognise all the distress.
30. The Council and its equipment service have told Miss X they have made improvements to prevent similar problems in future. However, apart from the changes to referrals to the OT service and Council complaints process, the Council has not provided any details of the changes or improvements made. I am not satisfied the Council has provided sufficient evidence of the changes made so I have recommended it review these changes and provide evidence of this to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. When a council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them. So, although I found fault with the actions of the Council’s equipment service and supplier, I have made recommendations to the Council.
32. Within one month of my final decision the Council will:
• further apologise to Miss X for the lack of choice its equipment service provided and the lack of a proactive approach to exploring and planning to meet her equipment needs;
• pay her the £400 is has already offered to recognise the distress and frustration it caused; and
• review Miss X’s care and support plan to ensure these contain adequate contingency plans for coping without access to any special order equipment.
33. Within three months of my final decision the Council will:
• review the changes its equipment service and supplier have made in response to Miss X’s complaint. It should ensure the changes made sufficiently address the fault previously accepted;
• review how the equipment service, acting on its behalf, promotes choice when arranging equipment to meet assessed needs. It should ensure that the equipment service has sufficient procedures in place to meet it and the Council’s responsibilities to promote choice in care planning;
• review whether its equipment service and supplier have sufficient procedures in place for recoding details of equipment supplied and for preventative checks or maintenance of ‘special order’ items. It should also ensure any procedures are operating effectively; and
• if any of these reviews identify that improvement are required, ensure the relevant organisations make any required changes.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have completed my investigation. There was fault in how the Council’s community equipment service took too long to replace and repair community equipment it had provided. It also failed to community properly with Miss X or to take a proactive approach when the delays became prolonged. The Council agreed to pay Miss X the financial remedy is had already offered and apologise further for the extra injustice we have found. It also agreed to review its equipment service’s and supplier’s procedures.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman