Summary: The Council has ensured that supported living accommodation close to Mr and Mrs X’s home is operating to reduce risks and meet the care needs of the tenants. There is no evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain the Council has failed to ensure the proper and safe running of nearby supported living accommodation.
2. They say that the Council’s shortcomings mean that the surrounding residents have suffered antisocial and criminal behaviour, and that those living at the supported living property are not getting the care they need.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. Mr and Mrs X complain about the Council’s actions from around 2022 onwards.
6. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
7. Mr and Mrs X complained to the Ombudsman in December 2025. I appreciate that Mr and Mrs X have been pursuing matters with the Council and the care provider. They tell me that it took some time to find out who to contact at the Council and then to get a response from the Council. However, based on the information I have currently, there are no good reasons why they did not complain to us sooner. This means that I have investigated the Council’s actions and decisions from December 2024 to December 2025.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mr and Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

10. Mr and Mrs X live in a small rural village. A care provider rented a nearby house for supported living accommodation. The Council and others placed adults with social care needs in the house, and commissioned the care provider to support them in accordance with their individual support needs.
11. Mr and Mrs X say that the care and supervision of the tenants has not been good enough, and the adults with care needs have caused some significant antisocial behaviour. Mr and Mrs X describe how some of the tenants have been taking and selling drugs around the local area, some have assaulted staff and each other, set fire to a neighbour’s vehicle and smashed windows, and some have trespassed onto neighbours’ property. Mr and Mrs X say that the police and emergency services have often been in attendance, and have sometimes arrested tenants. They describe that this has caused distress to local families, making them feel unsafe.
12. In addition, the local planning authority (a different council), found that the care provider did not have planning permission to operate a care facility from that property, and when it later applied for this permission, the planning authority refused the application. The care provider then got a licence for a house in multiple occupation, but Mr and Mrs X complain it is not adhering to the conditions and too many people are living at the property.
13. Mr and Mrs X raised these concerns with the Council. It assured them that it had acted on their concerns. Mr and Mrs X say that the Council told them it had not followed the correct procedures to check the care provider could support the tenants safely. Mr and Mrs X say that since then, new senior officers have not been aware of earlier incidents, and they feel that oversight and monitoring should have been in place from the start.
14. The Council has sent me a summary of incidents involving the various tenants and the relevant safeguarding documents. It is clear that there have been some serious incidents and these would have been distressing and worrying to Mr and Mrs X and their neighbours. Some of these incidents happened before the period I have investigated. However, they inform the action the Council took to make sure that care was being provided that was safe for tenants and local neighbours.
15. The Council has conducted an internal review of the issues raised by Mr and Mrs X, and it investigated and responded to them on each issue.
16. The Council’s care commissioning service and its quality assurance team have monitored and supported the care provider. In the last two years, it has had ten contract review meetings, and visited five times to monitor how the care provider is operating. The Council has also visited tenants regularly to ensure their needs are being met by the care provider.
17. The Council has provided its assessment documents and the reports of its visits to the supported living accommodation. These show that the Council saw evidence of safe, effective and responsive care. The care provider had acted on the incidents involving its tenants and had engaged in the safeguarding processes.
18. The Council found that an incident inside the home had not been escalated appropriately. The Council raised this with the appropriate safeguarding authority, and asked the care provider to review what had gone wrong. The care provider found that a staff member had not followed the correct process. It took disciplinary action and implemented a set of improvements based on what had happened.
19. The Council followed up with regular visits and has made sure that any recommendations it has made have been implemented.

Was there fault by the Council causing an injustice to Mr and Mrs X

20. Mr and Mrs X have raised some serious concerns. The most serious incidents happened before the timeframe of my investigation. I have focused on what the Council has done since then to address the issues.
21. There has been no fault by the Council. It has a good level of oversight and monitoring. Its visits and assessments show that it continues to take action to address the issues raised. The Council has liaised with the Police and Fire Service, as well as the safeguarding authority, and health partners.
22. The Council has also shown that it has regularly reviewed the care plans and the care provided to the tenants for whom it has commissioned support. It has stayed in contact with the care provider to make sure that the person’s needs are met and has considered what is appropriate to keep the person safe and reduce risks to them and the public, particularly when they can display risky or antisocial behaviour.
23. Mr and Mrs X have said the Council should have checked that the care provider had the correct planning permission and licence before commissioning care. This happened before the timeframe of my investigation, but the local planning authority did not reach its final position until more recently. The planning authority investigated the planning breaches, and the care provider got the correct licence. Even if there was fault by the Council here it has been resolved, and the care provider not having the correct planning permission or licence does not impact significantly on Mr and Mrs X.
24. Mr and Mrs X say the number of people living at the accommodation exceeds the terms of the licence. The Council raised this with the care provider and asked for evidence of the occupancy. It followed up on Mr and Mrs X’s concerns.
25. The Council could have referred the issues raised to the local environmental protection authority. This is a different authority to the Council, and it is responsible for dealing with antisocial behaviour. I cannot see that the Council has done this, but it has made sure the Police is aware of serious incidents. The Police Service is also an antisocial behaviour partner and too could refer the issues to the correct authority if it is unable to take action.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman