Summary: Mr D complains the Council failed to provide him with social care and housing support. The Council failed to properly assess Mr D’s needs and offer support to help him meet his housing need. To remedy the complaint the Council has agreed to make Mr D a symbolic payment, make procedural improvements and provide staff training.

The complaint

1. Ms Y complains on behalf of Mr D. Ms Y complains the Council failed to safeguard Mr D and provide him with suitable housing and support. This has left him without the care and housing he needs and vulnerable to exploitation and harm.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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

6. I spoke with Ms Y and considered her complaint and information she provided. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response. I considered:-
• Care Act 2024 and the associated Care and Support Statutory Guidance;
• The Council’s:
1. Safeguarding policy,
2. Complaints policy,
3. Housing Allocation policy,
• social care case notes;
• Mr D’s care assessments and support plans.
7. Ms Y 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

Background information

8. Mr D has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and received support from the Council. Mr D was living in short term accommodation and his mother provided him with both practical and emotional support. Mr D’s mother died suddenly and shortly afterwards he was told he had to leave his temporary accommodation.

What should have happened

Social Care Support

9. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 says councils must carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve.
10. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan. The care and support plan should consider what needs the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area.

Reviews

11. Section 27 of the Care Act 2014 says councils should keep care and support plans under review. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance says councils should review plans at least every 12 months. Councils should consider a light touch review six to eight weeks after agreeing and signing off the plan and personal budget. Councils must also conduct a review if an adult or a person acting on the adult’s behalf makes a reasonable request for one.

Safeguarding

12. Paragraph 14.2 Care and Support Statutory Guidance says,
13. “The safeguarding duties apply to an adult who:
• has needs for care and support (whether or not the local authority is meeting any of those needs)
• is experiencing, or at risk of, abuse or neglect
• because of those care and support needs is unable to protect themselves from either the risk of, or the experience of abuse or neglect”
14. A council should always involve the adult from the beginning of the enquiry unless there are exceptional circumstances that would increase the risk of abuse.

Advocacy

15. Paragraph 7.4 Care and Support Statutory Guidance says, “Local authorities must arrange an independent advocate to facilitate the involvement of a person in their assessment, in the preparation of their care and support plan and in the review of their care plan, as well as in safeguarding enquiries and SARs if 2 conditions are met. That if an independent advocate were not provided then the person would have substantial difficulty in being fully involved in these processes and second, there is no appropriate individual available to support and represent the person’s wishes who is not paid or professionally engaged in providing care or treatment to the person or their carer.”

Housing

Applications

16. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ they ‘may be’ homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)

The prevention duty

17. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

18. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This may include interim accommodation if a person is in priority need. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

19. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure accommodation that is available for their occupation.
20. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

Choice based lettings

21. The Council is a partner in a local choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which are advertised.

Priority

22. The Council’s Allocations Scheme sets out how it prioritises applicants. Relevant to this complaint, it says:
• applicants who can demonstrate they are homeless or threatened with homelessness, but who are not owed a main housing duty by the Council, will be placed in Band C.
• in June 2022 the Council updated its policy so applicants owed the main housing duty would be placed in Band B.
• applicants awarded a ‘high’ priority by the Welfare Assessment Panel will be placed in Band B.

What happened

23. Mr D contacted the Council to say he had found accommodation living with a friend. An officer discussed this with the commissioning team and told the landlord that Mr D should have a tenancy agreement. The landlord agreed to this but said he needed help.
24. The Council provided Mr D with a Tenancy Support Officer to help him with claiming benefits. A transitions worker completed a transfer document which highlighted the support Mr D needed when he moved from children’s to adults’ services. This included support in completing a housing contract and support in claiming benefits as he had a low income.
25. Over the next few weeks, Mr D contacted the Council asking for help as he had no money for food. The Council directed Mr D to a local food bank and supported him with his benefits and college courses. A housing support worker also registered Mr D for Homechoice but said it may be a while before he was eligible to bid on properties.
26. Mr D’s case moved from the transition team to an adults’ team in June 2022. The Council assigned Mr D officer A. On 30 June a housing officer raised concerns about Mr D’s housing with officer A. The housing officer said she would help Mr D complete an Assistance to Support application for Homechoice. If successful this would increase his priority banding from E to C. Both considered Mr D’s accommodation was not suitable for his long-term needs.
27. On 13 July the housing officer asked officer A for a supporting letter for a welfare assessment, as he was ineligible for Access to Support. If successful this would increase Mr D’s priority banding to B. In July 2022 the transition plan was updated and it said Mr D needed support to get long term accommodation to be near his family. Mr D also had eligible needs for help with planning and budgeting his food, personal care (dealing with medical appointments, getting prescriptions and laundry) and support with practical aspects of daily living (bus timetables, benefit support and support in getting and remaining in employment). The support plan said Mr D needed four and half hours of care per week. It does not appear this care was put in place because the Council could not get a care agency to support Mr D.
28. In January 2023 the Council completed a review which resulted in a reassessment of Mr D’s needs as he was only receiving informal support. In March 2023 the Council secured support for Mr D to receive one and a half hours of care per week to meet his needs.
29. Ms Y contacted the Council is September 2023 raising a safeguarding alert about Mr D’s living conditions. Ms Y said the accommodation was uninhabitable and Mr D needed more support as his physical and mental health had worsened.
30. Following the alert the Council made several enquiries and decided not to consider the matter under its safeguarding procedures. This was because it decided Mr D did not meet the safeguarding threshold. It said,
31. “I have consulted Cornwall Council policies relating to safeguarding, which note: Where an adult is engaging with and accepting assessment or services that will meet their care and support needs they are not demonstrating that they are ‘unable to protect themselves’ as set out in the criteria for a s. 42……Mr D has been described as a resourceful person….……Ms Y accepts that as Mr D is ultimately accepting the assessment and support planning process at this stage, the safeguarding threshold is not met”.
32. The Council reassessed Mr D’s social care needs and his care increased by nine hours per week. There was also liaison with the housing department. The Council liaised with Ms Y to look at the housing repair issues and the tenancy agreement with the landlord. Ms Y said there was mould in Mr D’s property and no basin in the bathroom. Ms Y said the landlord intimidated Mr D. Mr D was scared the landlord would ask him to leave if he complained about his housing and he would have nowhere to go that would accept his therapeutic cat.
33. On 2 October the Council provided Ms Y with advice about the tenancy in particular protection from eviction. It also thought the property unsuitable for permanent residency and the relief duty under the Homeless Reduction Act 2022 on grounds of unsuitability was applicable.
34. The Council advised Ms Y there was a housing shortage and any temporary housing “would be far from convenient for Mr D. It would be a B&B type of place….and could be anywhere in Cornwall or Devon and he would be moved to where there was availability as this is outsourced. This has been considered in the past but not considered in Mr D's best interest.” On 11 October the Council accepted it had a relief duty to Mr D.
35. In October the Council also referred Mr D to an advocacy service. However it appears Mr D did not meet the criteria for an advocate.
36. The Council accepted a main duty on 13 December. The Council says it verbally offered Mr D temporary accommodation in January 2024 and reviewed his Personal Housing Plan. The Council says it reoffered temporary accommodation in March. The Council says on both occasions Mr D has declined the offer as he has a pet and he would like to move in a planned way. The Council says it is supporting Mr D with looking for temporary accommodation near his family where he can also have his cat both in the private and social housing sectors.
37. The Council says Mr D is now in Band B on the Homechoice register. Mr D is able to bid independently and has made several bids on property but has so far been unsuccessful. Ms Y continues to help Mr D and has offered to be a guarantor within the private rental market. However to date this has been unsuccessful.
38. In response to a draft decision of this complaint the Council provided an update to say it offered Mr D alternative temporary accommodation which he has moved into.

Was there fault causing injustice?

Social Care Services

39. Mr D is a vulnerable young adult, he received support services while his mother was alive and his needs increased after she died. The context of Mr D’s age and the sudden loss of his mother who was his main support is important when considering this complaint and the Council’s interventions.
40. There is evidence of Mr D’s transition worker providing emotional and practical support to Mr D after his mother passed away. Mr D took steps to secure and move into his initial property. This occurred very quickly, with limited social work involvement, and although not ideal met Mr D’s immediate housing needs. The Council liaised with the landlord so Mr D had a tenancy agreement and helped him claim benefits to pay for his rent and to meet his daily living expenses. I therefore find no fault in the initial actions of the Council.
41. Although the Council assessed Mr D eligible for care services in July 2022 it did not provide support because of the lack of an available care agency. The Care Act says councils must meet eligible care needs. The failure to do so was not in line with the Care Act and is service failure.
42. Mr D did not get the support he needed which may have prevented him having to use a food bank or getting into financial difficulty. While officer A did support Mr D with his money this was not on an ongoing basis.
43. The Council also failed to review Mr D’s needs. This was important as Mr D had just lost his mother and his needs and emotions were in flux. Much of the support the Council relied on was through voluntary agencies and the Council did not record how long it was available for.
44. The Council reassessed Mr D for services in January 2023 and reduced his care package. The Ombudsman cannot challenge a professional judgement where there is no procedural fault. There is no fault in the officer’s assessment. The assessment considered Mr D’s needs, the support he had available and the actions needed to promote his independence. While the Council was able to secure provision for Mr D it did not complete a six week review of the services provided. This is fault and not in line with the Care Act. When the Council completed a reassessment following Ms Y’s safeguarding concerns Mr D’s general wellbeing had declined and his care increased to ten hours per week.
45. I cannot say now whether had the Council reviewed Mr D’s needs earlier it would have changed Mr D’s support hours; but Mr D and Ms Y have the uncertainty Mr D’s health might not have declined to the extent it did.
46. Ms Y says Mr D should have had an advocate. There is nothing to suggest Mr D could not explain his needs. Mr D also had a tenancy support worker and for the most part officer A who helped him. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance says people should have access to an advocate if one is needed. There was nothing to suggest this was needed and I am therefore unable to find fault with this aspect of the complaint.
47. The Council decided not to deal with Ms Y’s concerns about Mr D’s living conditions as safeguarding as it did not meet the threshold. The Council made a reasoned decision and I have found no procedural fault in how it made this decision. However it would have been good practice to speak with Mr D to get his views.
48. Mr D had ongoing support from the Council following the alert, so even if I were to find fault with the Council’s actions, on balance I do not consider he was caused significant injustice by the lack of a safeguarding process.

Housing duties

49. Mr D was already on the housing waiting list when his mother passed away. Mr D had a prevention plan in place. This included a series of actions and advice. There is evidence the Council supported Mr D with getting alternative accommodation and this continued with Ms Y.
50. Following the safeguarding alert the Council decided it owed Mr D a relief duty, it completed a Personalised Housing Plan but said it did not have to provide Mr D with interim accommodation as he was not in priority need. It is unclear how the Council decided it did not have a duty to provide interim housing when it later decided it owed Mr D a main duty and he was in priority need. Mr D’s housing had not changed during the intervening period. I therefore consider the Council should have offered interim and temporary accommodation when the duties arose. The failure to do so was fault.
51. The Council says it offered to find Mr D temporary accommodation but he refused on the basis he wanted a planned move. The Council has not provided any notes of these conversations nor any evidence it offered Mr D suitable accommodation. There are however notes that it told Ms Y it is likely Mr D would only be offered B&B accommodation which would not meet his needs. The Council is at fault for failing to offer Mr D suitable accommodation. It is also at fault for failing to properly advise Mr D that it had to offer him suitable accommodation which met his needs. While the question of suitability would have been up to the Council to decide, and Mr D may have rejected any formal offers, he lost an opportunity to consider alternative accommodation.
52. I have considered whether the Council owed Mr D a relief duty before October 2023. Because of the passage of time there is insufficient information to say had the Council properly considered its relief duties when Mr D first moved into the property it would have made the same decision. This is because some of the issues Ms Y now complains of were not there/known of at the time. This includes the nature of the landlord and the general disrepair of the property which might have deteriorated over the year.
53. The Council has properly considered Mr D’s housing band and has provided evidence of support it has provided to Mr D in bidding for properties. There is no fault with this element of the complaint. However the Council did not complete a welfare assessment until over a year after it had concerns about Mr D’s property. Had it completed the assessment earlier it is more likely than not Mr D would have got into Band B earlier.
54. As a result of these failures Mr D has the uncertainty he could have moved into suitable temporary accommodation, moved into private rented accommodation, or successfully bid on permanent accommodation earlier.

Back to top

Agreed action

55. I have found fault in the actions of the Council which has caused Mr D and Ms Y injustice. The Council has agreed to take the following actions to remedy the personal injustice and improve future practise.
56. Within one month of the final decision the Council will:-
1. apologise to Mr D and Ms Y for the failure to properly review Mr D’s needs and offer alternative suitable accommodation;
2. pay Mr D £500 a symbolic payment for the uncertainty caused by the Council’s actions; and,
3. pay Ms Y £150 for the time and trouble in pursuing the Council for actions it should have taken to review and support Mr D.
57. Within three months of the final decision the Council should:-
1. remind staff either by a staff circular or team meetings about the importance of reviewing care packages within the statutory periods, or more regularly if needed;
2. remind staff either by a staff circular or team meetings about the duty to offer suitable alternative accommodation when it has identified both relief and main housing duties.
58. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the actions above.

Back to top

Final decision

59. I have found fault in the actions of the Council which has caused Mr D and Ms Y injustice. I consider the actions above are suitable to remedy the complaint and improve future practice and have completed my investigation and closed the complaint on this basis.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman