Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has failed to challenge care providers when they would not accept Miss Y into their care home because of her learning disability. We found there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council has failed to challenge care providers when they would not accept Miss Y into their care home because of her learning disability. Mrs X says that as the learning disability is not Miss Y’s primary need it should not have hindered providers accepting her. Miss Y has been upset when she has spent time visiting homes and then been rejected, and Mrs Y has had a lot of time and trouble until finally persuading a home to offer Miss Y a place.

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. 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

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. 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

6. Mrs X’s sister, Miss Y has a care and support plan and was living in supported living accommodation. The Council completed a care assessment in 2024 which identified Miss Y’s needs were not being met in the supported living placement and she need a care home placement. Miss Y’s primary care needs relate to her mobility, but Miss Y also has mild learning disabilities.
7. The Council amended Miss Y’s support plan and increased her social support hours pending a move to a care home. It also explored social groups and day services to identify any activities Miss Y may be interested in joining.
8. Miss Y and her family want Miss Y her to remain in the local area so that family can visit her. The Council sent Miss Y’s care assessment to a number of local care homes several of which invited Miss Y to visit so that they could determine whether or not they could meet her needs.
9. Mrs X complains about two care homes that declined to offer Miss Y a place as they were unable to meet her needs. The homes said they do not have the appropriate registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to accepted Miss Y due to her learning disabilities.
10. We have previously investigated Mrs X’s complaint about the first home’s refusal to offer Miss Y a place and will not revisit that decision. This complaint relates to the second home’s (Care Home B) decision not to offer Miss Y a place.
11. The Council contacted Care Home B to discuss the decision not to offer Miss X a place. The records of the call note Care Home B assessed Miss Y had high dependency needs. Although Miss Y’s learning disability needs were secondary, Care Home B felt they would be more prominent during hoisting and transfers. The care home also noted Miss Y needed two carers for hoisting and personal care, was bed bound and that they would need specialist beds and hoisting.
12. Mrs X made a formal complaint to Care Home B. She was unhappy the home had a copy of Miss Y’s care plan and was aware of her needs before they visited and had encouraged Miss Y to believe she would be able to move there. She asked for an explanation for the home’s decision not to offer a place. Care Home B told Mrs X it felt there was insufficient information about Miss Y’s mental health and how she is best supported living with her learning disability.
13. The Council was satisfied Miss Y’s assessment was clear and reflected her needs well. It contacted Care Home B to clarify what information it thought was missing and reminded the care home it could have asked about the assessment if it was unsure of Miss Y’s needs.
14. Mrs X asked the Council to carry out an assessment to reflect Miss Y’s learning disabilities. The Council confirmed it did not carry out specific learning disability assessments but the Care Act assessment would reference specific disabilities where necessary. It also confirmed it had shared all the relevant information with prospective homes. But that care homes carry out their own assessments before offering a place and can decide who they wanted to support as they were private businesses. The Council cannot compel a care home to offer someone a place.
15. Since Mrs X complained to us Miss Y has been offered a place at care home. Mrs X says this care home also initially refused to offer Miss X a place based on their CQC registration. The care home then revised its position and offered Miss Y a place when Mrs X contacted the care home’s Chief Executive to raise concerns. Miss Y moved to this care home in July 2024.
16. Mrs X says Miss Y’s current care home has the same CQC registration as the other homes who refused to offer a place based on Miss Y’s learning disabilities. She believes the Council should have done more to assist Miss Y by challenging these care homes’ interpretation of their CQC registration restrictions. She maintains their first choice care home would have been able to meet Miss Y’s needs and should have offered her a place. This would have avoided a year of unnecessary distress and uncertainty for Miss Y and the family and saved Mrs X considerable time and effort.

Analysis

17. The delays and difficulties in finding a suitable care home that would offer Miss Y a place have clearly caused Miss Y and Mrs X significant distress and disappointment. However there is no evidence of fault on the part of the Council in relation to this search.
18. It is understandable that Miss X wants to remain in her local area, close to family, but this inevitably restricts the number of potential care homes the Council can consult. The Council has explored all of the care homes in Miss Y’s local area, four of which said they were unable to meet Miss X’s needs. And while the other two homes would have offered Miss Y a place Mrs X did not consider them suitable. The Council could have expanded its search to care homes in other areas but Mrs X and Miss Y were clear they did not want to move out of the area.
19. Mrs X disputes that the local care homes could not meet Miss Y’s needs and believes the Council should have done more to support Miss Y. However, the Council was not involved in these decisions. The care homes are all private businesses and will make their own assessment of whether they can meet Miss Y’s needs. The Council shared appropriate information with the care homes and offered to discuss Miss Y’s needs with them. They also sought explanations when the homes refused to offer Miss Y a place. Where a care home declines to offer a place, the Council is unable to compel them to.
20. Miss X complains Miss Y is disadvantaged by the CQC’s registration requirements and that the CQC has provided contradictory information about care homes’ ability to offer Miss Y a place. We cannot consider Mrs Y’s concerns about the CQC, this is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Back to top

Decision

21. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman