Summary: X complained about poor service and poor communication from the Council’s adult social care teams. The Council was at fault. It did not respond appropriately to reported safeguarding concerns, did not comply with an agreed reasonable adjustment and communicated with X poorly. The Council has agreed to consider the safeguarding concerns and keep X updated of any action taken, apologise to X and pay them £150 in recognition of the frustration and distress caused.

The complaint

1. X complains the Council:
• did not appropriately investigate when their personal assistant raised safeguarding concerns about potential financial abuse in June 2021;
• Failed to make agreed reasonable adjustments when contacting them in August 2021;
• Has failed to recognise their autism diagnosis, despite having evidence of this;
• Refused to carry out a financial review; and
• Has communicated with them poorly.
2. They say the financial abuse has caused them financial loss and the Council’s actions have caused them frustration and distress. They want the Council to investigate the safeguarding concerns, complete a financial review, accept their autism diagnosis, make the agreed reasonable adjustments and respond appropriately to emails.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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 read X’s complaint and considered information they provided.
6. I made enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent me.
7. X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

Adult care and support

8. A council has a duty to arrange care and support for those with eligible needs, and a power to meet both eligible and non-eligible needs in settings other than care homes. A council has discretion to charge for non-residential care following a person’s needs assessment.
9. Where a council has decided to charge, it must carry out a financial assessment to decide what a person can afford to pay. It must then give the person a written record of the completed assessment.
10. A direct payment is a payment made to people with eligible care and support needs so they can arrange their own care, rather than the Council arranging it for them. A person employed directly by the service user to provide care is called a personal assistant.

Safeguarding adults

11. A council must make enquiries if it has reason to think a person may be at risk of abuse or neglect and has care and support needs which mean the person cannot protect themself. An enquiry is the action taken by a council in response to a concern about abuse or neglect. An enquiry could range from a conversation with the person who is the subject of the concern to a more formal multi-agency arrangement. A council must also decide whether it or another person or agency should take any action to protect the person from abuse. (section 42, Care Act 2014)

Reasonable adjustments

12. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body which carries out a public function. It aims to make sure that a disabled person can use a service as close as it is reasonably possible to get to the standard usually offered to non-disabled people.
13. Service providers are under a positive and proactive duty to take steps to remove or prevent obstacles to accessing their service. If the adjustments are reasonable, they must make them.

What happened

14. X is an adult with care and support needs. In 2015, X asked the Council to use email to contact them. The Council agreed to this request.
15. The Council reviewed X’s care and support in March 2020. The assessment listed X’s health conditions, which included autism. It recorded X’s preferred method of contact was by email and that this arrangement had been in place since 2015. It said X currently had seven hours support per week from a personal assistant (PA), paid for through a direct payment. The PA supported X with accessing the community, shopping, dealing with correspondence and personal care. The review recommended X’s care and support hours be increased to nine hours via a direct payment, to include support with managing finances and correspondence. This was agreed and so X’s care hours increased to nine per week.
16. In June 2021, X’s PA discussed a safeguarding concern with a Council officer (officer A). They said X was concerned that another PA had claimed for hours not actually worked. X was no longer employing the PA concerned. Officer A considered the allegation and discussed it with a colleague. They contacted the finance team who advised that X’s direct payment account did not suggest any unusual activity and that the amount of hours being claimed was broadly in line with the number of hours commissioned. Officer A considered the matter may be a difference of opinion about what tasks were being completed and the hours being claimed for. They concluded the evidence did not support the need for a safeguarding referral and so they took no further action. I have seen no evidence they told X of this decision.
17. The Council reviewed X’s care and support again in August 2021. The review was completed by another Council officer, officer B. The record includes X’s diagnosis of autism. Officer B phoned X as part of the review to discuss their care and support needs. X says they told officer B they preferred email for communication, but officer B dismissed this and continued to ask them questions over the phone.
18. The Council also started a financial review. It sent X a self assessment form to complete and return to the Council. X contacted the Council to say they had difficulty competing forms due to their health conditions and asked the Council for a home visit. The Council did not respond to this request.
19. X’s advocate contacted officer B. They repeated the allegations regarding X’s former PA charging for hours they had not worked. They said the Council had not responded to the allegations, had not complied with an agreed reasonable adjustment to use email for all communications and had ignored X’s request for a home visit to complete the financial review. The Council did not respond to this email or take any action.
20. X complained to the Council about the phone call from officer B and the content of this call and the failure to arrange a home visit for the financial assessment.
21. The Council responded to their complaint in September 2021. It apologised for officer B’s phone call. It said the agreement that all contact should be by email was not clearly documented on X’s case record and this information was difficult to find. It said it had now clearly documented this on the front of their record to ensure this was clear. It apologised if they felt officer B had not listened to them during the call and for any inconvenience caused. It said it had discussed the matter with officer B who had learnt from the complaint. It said it had asked the finance team to contact them about the financial assessment.
22. X was dissatisfied with this response and asked to escalate their complaint. They said the Council had refused to accept their autism diagnosis, had not responded to their safeguarding concerns and continued to ignore their request for a home visit for the financial review.
23. With support from their PA, X completed the financial self assessment report and sent this to the Council. The Council then completed the financial review in October 2021.
24. The Council responded to say it would not consider their complaint further. X remained dissatisfied and brought their complaint to us.
25. In its response to our enquiries the Council said:
• The email setting out the safeguarding concerns to officer B in August 2021 had been overlooked. It had now asked officer B to consider the safeguarding concerns and take any appropriate action.
• It will carry out regular audits of case files to ensure compliance with reasonable adjustments going forward.
• X’s diagnosis of autism was now recorded on the front of their record.

Analysis

Safeguarding concerns

26. The records show that officer A considered the allegations reported by X’s PA in June 2021 but decided to take no further action. There is no evidence officer A told the PA or X of their decision, which led to uncertainty.
27. When X’s advocate raised these concerns again in August 2021, the Council did not respond or take any action. It has told us this email was overlooked by officer B. This was fault. The Council has said it has now asked officer B to consider the concerns and act if needed. This is an appropriate response to ensure X’s concerns are now investigated but X had already raised concerns in June and August 2021. The lack of response to X’s concerns at the time they raised them caused frustration and uncertainty about whether the Council was taking their concerns seriously.

Reasonable adjustments

28. In its complaint response to X, the Council accepted that officer B should not have telephoned X in August 2021 and apologised for this. I agree with this finding and this is fault. The records show the agreement to contact them by email had been in place since 2015. This should have been clearly documented on X’s casefile at the time it was agreed. The phone call caused X distress. In its complaint response, the Council apologised for the phone call and any inconvenience caused and told them the action taken to prevent the fault recurring. This is an appropriate remedy for this part of the complaint.

Recognition of X’s autism diagnosis

29. The care and support review documents from March 2020 and August 2021 include record of X’s diagnosis of autism. The evidence shows the Council was aware of the diagnosis and this was clearly documented on their case records. The Council was not at fault.

X’s financial review

30. X requested a home visit to complete the financial review in August 2021. Despite X explaining the reasons for the request, the Council did not arrange a visit nor did it explain why it could not do so. This is fault which is likely to have caused X further frustration and distress. After X submitted their financial self assessment form in September 2021, the Council did complete the financial review and there was no fault in how it completed this process.

Poor communication

31. Overall, there is evidence of poor communication with X. This is shown by:
• the failure to respond to the reported safeguarding concern, both in June and August 2021 and to keep X updated of any decisions taken;
• the telephone contact in August 2021, despite the agreement to contact X by email; and
• the failure to respond to X’s request for a home visit for the financial review.

These actions have caused X frustration, uncertainty and distress. The Council has already apologised for the phone call but I have recommended a further remedy below for the injustice caused, in line with our guidance on remedies.

Back to top

Agreed action

32. Within one month of the final decision the Council will:
1. Provide an update to X on any action taken in response to the safeguarding concerns raised.
2. Write to X to apologise for the faults identified and pay them £150 in recognition of the frustration and distress caused by the poor service.
3. Share the findings of this complaint with relevant officers to remind them of the importance of responding to reports of safeguarding concerns and of ensuring good communication with service users.

The Council should provide us with evidence it has completed these actions.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault and the Council has agreed action to remedy the injustice caused and improve Council services.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman