Summary: The Council was at fault for ending its support of Mr X without warning and without considering referring him to an advocate. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X, pay him £500 and take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that the Council stopped providing him with support in February 2021 despite his ongoing need for help to manage his home and finances.
2. Mr X says this has negatively affected his mental health. He is also struggling to manage his home and debts.

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 spoke to Mr X about the complaint and made written enquiries of the Council.
6. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
7. Mr X and the organisation now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

8. Mr X lives alone. Mr X struggled to manage his bills and the upkeep and repairs needed on his house.
9. In May 2020, the Council began supporting Mr X. It allocated a social worker who gave him advice about managing his utility debts and liaised with the utility company on his behalf.
10. In August, the Council completed a care and support assessment with Mr X. As part of this assessment, it recorded that Mr X “can become very frustrated and agitated. It may be worth considering referring [Mr X] to an advocate in the future.”
11. In December, the Council allocated Mr X a new social worker. The Council says this is because Mr X had expressed dissatisfaction with, and been rude and aggressive towards, the social worker.
12. In February 2021, the Council wrote to Mr X to tell him that it was ending its support. The letter said this was because of Mr X’s “lack of engagement and not following advice provided”.
13. The Council’s records show that the same day, Mr X had been rude and aggressive towards the social worker in a phone call. The social worker discussed the case with their manager. The manager decided that the Council should stop supporting Mr X due to his “lack of engagement and aggression/hostility”.
14. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to stop supporting him.
15. Since complaining to the Ombudsman, the Council has started working with Mr X again. He has a new allocated social worker.

My findings

16. Mr X’s behaviour towards Council staff was unacceptable.
17. However, in ending its support in February 2021 I find the Council acted with fault. This is because when it assessed Mr X in August 2020, the Council identified that he found communicating with organisations and ‘bureaucracies’ difficult. It recorded that he might benefit from the support of an advocate. There is no evidence the Council considered whether to refer Mr X to an advocacy service before ending its support. This is fault.
18. The Council did not give Mr X any warning that his behaviour and lack of engagement might result in the Council ending its support. It did not write to him to say that it considered his behaviour unacceptable and what the consequences would be if it continued or what he needed to do to demonstrate engagement. This is an injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Agreed action

19. The Council has since started supporting Mr X again. He has a new social worker. I consider this to be a suitable remedy for most of the injustice to Mr X.
20. However, the Council has also agreed to:
• write to Mr X with an apology.
• pay Mr X £500 in recognition of the impact on him of the time he was without support.
21. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
22. To improve its services, the Council should produce a procedure or guidance for relevant staff on addressing unacceptable behaviour from service users. This should include ensuring that the service user is:
• aware of the behaviour in issue; and
• advised of the potential consequences of any continued unacceptable behaviour.
23. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within three months of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation. There is fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman