Summary: Mr J complained about the way the Council cleaned his property and dealt with his belongings. We found fault in record keeping but this did not cause significant injustice to Mr J. There was no fault by the Council in the other parts of the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr J complained the Council:
1. Delayed cleaning his home, causing his discharge from hospital in July 2023 to be delayed by almost a week.
2. Cleaned his property without him being present, causing him distress.
3. Allowed his belongings to become damaged by leaving them outside.
4. Delayed fixing his fence.
2. Mr J wants the Council to compensate him for the damaged property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
5. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the NHS. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)
6. 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

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have not investigated part d) of Mr J’s complaint about the repair of his fencing. This is because Mr J is a council tenant and, as set out in paragraph 4, the law says we cannot investigate complaints about disrepair in social rented housing. This is a matter for the Housing Ombudsman Service.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke to Mr J about his complaint and considered the information he sent and the Council’s response to my enquiries.
9. Mr J 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

Relevant law and guidance

Care and support

10. The Care Act 2014 requires local authorities to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. The assessment determines what the person's needs are and whether the person has any needs which are eligible for support from the council. Where councils have determined that a person has any eligible needs, they must meet those needs.

Safeguarding

11. A council must make enquiries if it thinks a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themselves. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse or neglect. (Care Act 2014, section 42)

What happened

12. I have set out the key events, this is not meant to detail everything that happened.
13. Mr J lives alone, he was not receiving any care and support. In July 2023 he fell and was taken into hospital. The ambulance service raised a safeguarding alert that Mr J’s home was cluttered and he may require care and support.
14. The hospital referred Mr J to the Council to assess his care and support needs and ensure his property was safe and clean to return to. It said Mr J had agreed to his home being cleaned before he was discharged from hospital.
15. The Council sought quotes for de-cluttering and a deep clean. On 18 July a cleaning contractor (“Company X”) asked Mr J for the keys so it could view his property and quote for the job.
16. The hospital deemed Mr J was medically fit for discharge on 24 July. The Council sought a care provider to provide home care to Mr J.
17. The Council accepted Company X’s quote on 26 July. It said it would clean inside the property only and the Council’s housing team would pick up any external clutter. It was agreed that Company X would not dispose of any of Mr J’s belongings. The clean would take two days.
18. The social worker visited Mr J in hospital on 27 July to start the care and support assessment. Mr J says it was agreed that he could visit his home for two hours whilst Company X was there the next day, to oversee the clean. There are no records of this conversation in the Council’s case records or in the assessment.
19. On 28 July, the Council told the hospital that Company X would be coming to pick up Mr J’s keys. Mr J’s son emailed the Council asking for an update on his father’s visit to his home. There were emails between the Council, Mr J’s son and the hospital. These show that the Council advised Mr J’s son that Company X would pick up the keys but would not be cleaning the property until Monday 31 July. The hospital said it had spoken to Mr J and “explained the clean can't take place today as the agency availability starts from Monday. … I understand this was not the original conversation and how frustrating this is, however this is outside anyone's control.”
20. Mr J’s son emailed the Council on 31 July that Mr J had not had any information about visiting his home with the cleaner. Company X went to Mr J’s home and partially cleaned the bedroom, bathroom and kitchen. The contractor showed before and after photographs to Mr J.
21. The Council discussed discharge arrangements with the hospital. It was agreed that Mr J would be discharged early on 2 August and meet Company X at his home to oversee the rest of the clean.
22. The case records show the social worker called Mr J at 10:48 on 2 August, he was at his home with Company X and the clean was progressing. Company X emailed the Council that evening to say the clean and declutter had been “successfully completed, Mr J was directing us all the way and was evidently pleased.”
23. The social worker visited Mr J the next day and the care and support assessment was completed on 9 August. Mr J said he did not require any home care but did want help with cleaning and shopping. A referral was made to local community services.
24. Mr J complained to the Council on 18 September. He said the Council had left about seven refuse bags outside. He was seeking compensation for the damage caused to these items as they had been left to rot.
25. The Council’s response on 11 October apologised for the delay in removing the bags; it had now arranged for this. Mr J remained dissatisfied as the Council had not responded to his complaint about the delay in discharging him from hospital and not being able to attend when Company X was at his home on 31 July. This had caused him distress as he had made it clear he did not wish for his belongings to be touched without being present.
26. The Council’s stage two response was sent on 28 March 2024. The Council said it had no records that it was agreed that the hospital would facilitate transport for Mr J to go home and return to the ward. Mr J had been kept informed of the cleaning arrangements and it was agreed that none of his possessions would be disposed of. It had no records of an agreement that Mr J would be present on 31 July but Mr J was at the property on 2 August and directed Company X what to do with his belongings. Mr J came to the Ombudsman in October 2024. He says some items have still not been removed.

My findings

27. Mr J complains that it was agreed with the Council that his home would be cleaned on 28 July but this was cancelled without his knowledge. The email exchanges on 28 July indicate there had been a discussion about this with Mr J.
28. There is no evidence that a clean was arranged for 28 July or that the Council cancelled a clean arranged for 28 July. Company X advised the Council it was unable to attend on 28 July. I therefore do not find there was fault by the Council in the date being changed to 31 July.
29. As the clean was to take two days, this means that Mr J not being able to be discharged until 2 August was not caused by fault by the Council.
30. Mr J says the Council agreed he could go home for two hours to oversee the cleaning of his property but then failed to arrange this. The only reference to this in the case records and emails is by Mr J’s son. I do not doubt that this was discussed with Mr J so I find there was poor record-keeping by the Council, which is fault. But this does not cause any significant injustice to Mr J that warrants a remedy.
31. However, I do not find fault by the Council in not arranging this visit. Although it was aware by 28 July that Mr J wished to do this, it would be for the hospital, not the Council, to agree to Mr J leaving and returning to the ward. Even if the Council had asked the hospital, it may not have been possible to arrange. I cannot investigate the actions of the NHS.
32. Mr J complains his belongings were left outside and therefore have become damaged. I do not find fault by the Council. Mr J oversaw the clean on 2 August and was able to advise Company X whether to put his belongings outside.
33. The Council has already apologised for not removing the refuse bags sooner. As these items were intended for disposal, I consider an apology a sufficient remedy.

Back to top

Decision

34. There was fault by the Council but this did not cause significant injustice to Mr J. I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman