Summary: Miss X complained that the Council failed to properly support her granddaughter to find supported accommodation. She also complained about its communication and explanation of processes. We found the Council could have better communicated its processes, there was delay in starting the search for accommodation and some delay finding respite care. We recommended the Council apologised, made a payment to them both and considered providing more information to service users about supported housing applications.

The complaint

1. Miss X lives with and supports her granddaughter (referred to in this statement as Y). She complains the Council failed to properly support Y to find and move into supported accommodation. She complains the request for help to find accommodation was made in August 2021 with a view to her granddaughter finding accommodation by June 2022, but there were significant delays and no progress had been made.
2. Miss X complains it was unclear what the correct processes were and staff had not been truthful.
3. Miss X complained that the situation led to Y having a mental health crisis and her own health has been affected. Miss X had to deal with major surgery during the period in question and the way the matter has been dealt with has caused considerable stress and anxiety.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
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 to Miss X and considered her complaint and the information she provided. I asked the Council for information and considered its response to the complaint.
7. Miss X 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

Universal Credit and Housing Benefit for supported accommodation

8. Government guidance ‘Housing Benefit guidance for supported housing claims’ defines supported housing. It states it is ‘Accommodation where residents require and are provided with care, support and/or supervision to help them live as independently as possible within the community.’
9. Paragraph 65 of the guidance states:

‘It is the responsibility of the Local Authority (LA) to determine whether the accommodation meets the specified accommodation definition and, as a result, whether their housing costs should be met through Housing Benefit (HB) or Universal Credit (UC). Until the LA makes this decision, the claimant cannot receive help with their housing costs from UC or HB. However, LAs should recommend that claimants make a UC claim to get help with their other living costs and show an intention to claim UC housing costs.’

Care and Support Statutory Guidance (CSSG)

10. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance says that councils should:
• ensure information supplied is clear. This means it is understood and able to be acted upon by the people receiving it;
• take all reasonable efforts to provide comprehensive information and advice at an early stage;
• signpost people to independent financial information and advice.
11. CSSG also says councils must provide information:
• “to help people understand what they may have to pay, when and why and how it relates to people’s individual circumstances”;
• that includes “the charging framework for care and support, how contributions are calculated … and how care and support choices may affect costs”; and
• to support people to make informed, affordable and sustainable financial decisions about care.
12. Section 15.51 of the guidance draws a distinction between councils’ social care and housing functions. It states:

‘Local authorities have broad powers to provide different types of accommodation in order to meet people’s needs for care and support. The Care Act is clear that suitable accommodation can be one way of meeting care and supports needs. However, the Act is also clear on the limits of responsibilities and relationship between care and support and housing legislation, to ensure that there is no overlap or confusion. Section 23 of the Care Act clarifies the existing boundary in law between care and support relevant housing legislation, such as the Housing Act 1996. Where a local authority is required to meet accommodation related needs under housing legislation as set out in the Housing Act 1996 or under any other legislation specified in regulations … then the local authority must meet those needs under that housing legislation.’

Background

13. Miss X lives with and supports her granddaughter, Y. Y has a learning disability and needs day to day support to live as independently as possible.
14. In early September 2021 Miss X emailed the Council stating that Y was keen to find out about moving to assisted living/supported accommodation, how long it would take to find something suitable and whether pets could be accommodated.
15. The Council suggested Miss X helped Y to register with local councils’ housing lists so that properties becoming available through that route could be considered, with a separate care package being arranged.
16. Miss X noted a social worker (SW) visited them on several occasions between September and November 2021. In September Miss X and the Council noted that Y did not want to move immediately, but the SW agreed to find out how long it might take, find about pets being accommodated and if a move could be agreed in principle. Miss X told the SW that she had registered Y for social housing with assistance from the Complex Needs Service the day before they met. (I understand this application was made to North Hertfordshire District Council).
17. In November 2021 the SW told Miss X that she would start the process of finding accommodation in January or February 2022.
18. Miss X says the officer told them starting in the new year would be enough time to ensure Y had accommodation by June 2022. This was because Mrs X had an operation planned for July and this would affect her ability to care for Y.
19. A case note on the Council’s systems in late December 2021 recorded a discussion with Miss X. In it the SW reiterated that they would start to plan for supported accommodation in the new year. The case notes stated the SW expected it to be a long process with Y but if things were in place sooner than expected, Y’s move could be delayed if appropriate.

The process

20. The Council explained that it has a framework of approved supported accommodation providers (care providers). The process the council follows is to document a service user’s needs and put this on an electronic system which care providers can access. Care providers then submit an interest in providing care/accommodation for a service user if they believe they can meet their needs. The Council stated care providers work with housing providers to offer a placement.
21. Another option is for the service user to find housing through a local council’s housing allocations system. Care and support can be arranged separately. The care may be funded by Direct Payments or by an Individual Service Fund (ISF).
22. Funding via a direct payment or ISF agreement could be used to purchase care from care providers who are not already approved council care providers.

What Happened

23. The Council told us a SW gained management agreement to search for accommodation for Y on 11 January 2022. The Council told its brokerage team at the end of February that Y would need sole occupancy accommodation (as Y could not share) and she would initially need sleep-in/overnight care. It explained Y would need prompts and support with most day-to-day household tasks and self-care. She would also need support to access the community. The Council noted Y struggled with meeting new people so the transition needed to be carefully considered. The Council noted Y had set a limited geographical area for the accommodation search and the accommodation needed to be ground floor. It also needed to accept a cat.
24. It took until 4 March to refer Y’s case to the relevant team to start the search. It took a further four weeks to put out Y’s requirements to care providers so they could register an interest.
25. The Council’s case notes record that Miss X was pressing for progress in March and April and becoming stressed because no accommodation had been found.
26. The SW’s case notes explained Y’s information was out with care providers and the advert was renewed when no interest was received. The SW noted it was difficult to say when accommodation would be found because availability of placements fluctuated.
27. On 16 May Miss X advised the Council Y would be getting a therapy dog in the summer, so the property would also need a garden. The Council noted that this would limit the available choices further.
28. The Council contacted a Care Provider (referred to as Care Provider A) on 16 May. The Council did not have an existing contractual agreement with Care Provider A. In some initial conversations with Mrs X, Care Provider A told Miss X that it did not currently have a suitable property. However, it could seek to purchase a property specific to Y’s needs, but this would be at a higher funding rate. Care Provider A agreed to assess Y’s needs. Care Provider A agreed to assess Y on 20 May.
29. On 19 May the Council advised Miss X that Care Provider A would not be doing an assessment. The Council stated Care Provider A did not source alternative appropriate housing, they had to wait for their own accommodation to become available. As they did not know when a property would become available, they did not want to raise Y’s hopes.
30. On 23 May a SW spoke to Miss X about the situation. Amongst other things the SW advised Miss X to apply for Y to join the local housing register. I understand Miss X believed Y would be unable to manage her own tenancy.
31. Miss X was unclear why Care Provider A told her it could source accommodation, when the SW told her that it could not. In response to our enquiries the Council told us that if Care Provider A sourced accommodation they required the Council to underwrite to pay the rent for an agreed extended period. This meant the rent had to be paid regardless of whether the property became empty during that time. The Council could not commit to paying rent for periods that the property may be empty.
32. By the summer of 2022, only two properties had been identified as possible options for Y.
• May 2022 a flat outside the geographical area.
• Mid-June a potential flat was being offered via Stevenage Borough Council’s housing allocation procedures. This was a one-bedroom flat. Miss X did not consider the flat would be suitable because Y needed a second bedroom for a carer to sleep in. I understand the Council was considering if a carer would be employed to provide ‘waking care’ at night. It also transpired that Y could not join Stevenage Borough Council’s housing register as she lived outside its area.
33. The Council told us in October 2022 the search area was widened.
34. In October Miss X advised the Council that she could not defer her operation any longer and she would be on the November list for surgery. She also advised the Council that Y‘s mental health was deteriorating.
35. On 27 October, the Council says it agreed that following Miss X’s operation, Y would remain at home with her with commissioned care being provided. The Council attempted to source this care without success. As a result, and following an incident on 31 October where Y became aggressive towards Miss X, she asked the Council to find Y emergency accommodation.
36. Miss X was due to have surgery on 5 November. I understand the Council found a temporary placement at a care home for Y. Miss X stated this was arranged at the last minute, and started the day after Miss X returned from hospital. The aim was to find accommodation for Y for two days. This was later extended, for up to two weeks.
37. The Council told us that the respite accommodation was ground floor and 1:1 staffing was in place to support Y, so it considered the care provider could meet Y’s needs. It stated the care provider had conducted an assessment of needs but this was done by telephone due to short notice in needing a placement.
38. Y remained at the care home for six days. She left at this point because she could not cope with the environment. Miss X complained that the accommodation was unsuitable for Y. Y’s needs were known by the Council as it had been searching for accommodation for her based on those needs. These needs included that Y could not share a bathroom and she had a sensitivity to food smells. At the care placement Y needed to share a toilet and her room was next to the kitchen. She also had no lock on her door which meant other residents walked in and out of her room.
39. The Council explained that, following Y’s return from respite it provided 35 hours of additional hours of support per week, for six weeks. This was paid via Direct Payments to help Ms X while she continued to recover from her operation.
40. Further long-term accommodation options were identified towards the end of 2022:
• In August 2022 Care Provider A told Miss X they had found a property. Miss X viewed it and agreed it was suitable. The Council says this would need to be pursued via an Individual Service Fund (ISF) as Care Provider A were not an approved provider. The cost of the rent at the property was such that there was a shortfall. The Council stated it could not meet this. Miss X was unhappy that the issue of affordability had not been considered before this point. However, on 2 December, following further consideration, Care Provider A stated the landlord of property they identified could not accept pets, so the offer from Care Provider A was withdrawn.
• A care provider (Care Provider B) identified a property, as Temporary Accommodation in November. This was not suitable for Y as she needed a permanent placement.
• In early December Care Provider B found a second-floor flat which would accept pets.
41. At the end of December Miss X raised concerns that there would be a shortfall in the rent at the property Care Provider B had found.
42. On 4 January Miss X visited the flat and on 5 January the Council stated Care Provider B had submitted their expected costs and these had been passed on for agreement.
43. In mid-January Miss X chased progress as she had heard nothing. On 20 January Miss X emailed the Council stating she understood from Care Provider B that the hold up was a shortfall in the monthly rent of £50-£100. She asked how this would be met and explained the family would be unable to help Y. In further emails Miss X explained the delay and the situation was making her and Y anxious. On 24 January Y’s tutor wrote to the Council to state that Y’s mental and physical health was getting to crisis point.
44. On 26 January the Council responded. It acknowledged the difficulties. It stated it had never assured Miss X or Y that accommodation would be available at a set date. It stated the delay was not with the Council deciding funding. It stated the issue was that Y was not claiming Universal Credit and Miss X had stated she would not support Y to claim Universal Credit until she moved out. Because of this, her Housing Benefit rate was uncalculated. It stated without the Universal Credit Claim it was impossible to have a clear understanding of Y’s income. The Council stated it could refer Miss X to support to apply for Y’s benefits.
45. Miss X acknowledged the council’s response but stated Care Provider B would not give them a rental agreement until any shortfall was covered so she sought a guarantee that the Council would meet this. She considered they were at stalemate. She asked the Council to say why it would not agree to meet the rent shortfall.
46. The Council explained it was not a housing authority and received no funding to meet rent shortfalls. It stated the accommodation element of her care would be met via Universal Credit/Housing Benefit.
47. At a meeting in February the Care Provider agreed to fund up to a £50 rent shortfall in the short term. Miss X told us she agreed to pick this up when she was in full time work and had surplus funds.
48. Miss X subsequently raised concerns when a Housing Benefit calculator online suggested the shortfall would be greater. As I understand it, Miss X had not made a claim for benefits for Y but she was concerned the potential shortfall would be too great so she could not accept the property on that basis.
49. Following a meeting between Care Provider B and the Council on 8 March the care provider agreed to work with Y to meet the shortfall.
50. Miss X agreed to accept the property on 1 March 2023 and it understood she entered a benefit claim for Y the following week.
51. The Council told us that Care Provider B agreed to pay an amount towards the rent to make it affordable. The Council stated it has now agreed to make up the shortfall in rent. On 10 April 2023 Y moved into the property. This was a privately rented property with care and support. It met the criteria of ‘supported living accommodation’.

Complaint about paying additional Direct Payments

52. Miss X raised a further complaint that the Council had not paid for additional hours of care that had been agreed to support Y during March and April 2023. Council officers had questioned the amount of additional hours. In that complaint she also raised some inaccuracies with correspondence and the Council’s statement that Y did not want a transition to her new accommodation, she was happy to move in straight away.
53. The Council explained why staff had asked questions about the extent of the additional hours and what the support was for. It stated officers needed to make an informed decision. The Council agreed to fund the additional hours in response to the complaint following information Miss X provided.
54. The Council explained the comments Y made which indicated she did not want a planned transition and explained other comments Mr X had queried.

Was there fault by the Council

Initial Delay

55. The Council agreed to help find accommodation for Y in late 2021. At the time, the Council was aware that Miss X needed to have an operation in the summer and the aim was to find accommodation by June. I found no fault in the Council’s decision to begin the search for accommodation in early 2022. The Council judged that this would be sufficient time and it was a judgement the Council was entitled to make.
56. However, based on what the Council told us, it delayed taking action. It was not until 4 March that Y’s requirements were passed to the relevant team and Y’s requirements were not posted for care providers to respond to until April. Given the Council had been aware of the need to start the search for some time, the delay in starting the process was fault. It seems evident the lack of progress was causing anxiety to Miss X and to Y.
57. When accommodation was not found by the summer, Miss X postponed her operation. The initial delay is likely to have been partly the cause of this. However, it is not clear that it was the sole cause. It is evident that there was a lack of care providers who could meet Y’s particular needs and also to accept pets.
58. Although the geographical area was increased, there were still few options found to meet Y’s needs between October and December 2022. I recognise Y’s needs were detailed and made more difficult by her need for the property to accept pets. However, on balance, I found the limited options for meeting Y needs during the period April to December 2022 represents service failure. In saying this I note that staff had attempted to source options outside of its usual contracted suppliers. However, it seems to me the Council could have made it clearer at the outset that finding what was needed would be difficult. While it had not assured Miss X of the date that accommodation would be found, it was clear that Miss X and Y had been led to expect this was possible by the summer. Given Y’s needs and the need for pets to be accepted the Council could have begun looking sooner. The initial delay in starting the search should have been avoided. The delay was fault.

Delay December to April 2023

59. The accommodation Y eventually moved to in April 2023 was found in December 2022. We have considered the reasons why she was unable to move to the property sooner. The Council told us Miss X had not accepted the property until March and she had delayed submitting benefits claims for Y. It says the delay in taking up the property was caused by Miss X not claiming all the benefits Y was entitled to.
60. There were some delays by the Council in updating Miss X following concerns she was expressing in early 2022. I also found the Council could have explained more clearly why a benefits claim was the necessary first step to resolving the possible shortfall. That said, I note the Council had told Miss X to make benefit claims and offered her support to do this.
61. I recognise Miss X was concerned that regardless of a benefit claim there would be a shortfall. She was frustrated that it was not clear at that time how any shortfall would be met in principle. She was also recovering from an operation and dealing with Y’s a worsening mental health. However, it seems to me, on balance, that the lack of the appropriate benefit claim is likely to have been a key contribution to the delay in Y moving into this property. The amount of Housing Benefit payable for supported housing is potentially higher than that which is usually paid, and it was important to understand the full benefits that Y would be entitled to claim at this property. When this was known, it would have been clear if there would be a shortfall and it would be clear exactly how much it would be. Until this was known, any discussions about meeting a shortfall could only be hypothetical. It is appropriate that Councils encourage service users to claim the appropriate benefits before it considers whether any other discretionary funding should be considered or sought from other bodies to assist service users further. Statutory guidance also states that generally councils should make a clear distinction between paying for care and paying for housing cost, which it did.
62. I note that, in the event, the care provider agreed to help with the shortfall initially, and the Council has now agreed to meet this. This decision resolved the situation.
63. On balance, I did not find the delay between December and April was fault by the Council. However, if the Council’s communication about the process had been clearer it may have enabled the situation to move forward sooner. Its communication could have been clearer, this was fault. I have recommended the Council considers providing specific information which helps service users and those supporting them to navigate the differences in benefits payable and different funding options for supported housing.

Support for Miss X and Y

64. When the delays led to Miss X having an operation, the Council did provide additional support, but I found this was only put in place at short notice. It seemed evident that Y’s placement with Ms X was under strain. It also seems that the placement did not meet Y’s express needs causing it to break down. I found this was likely to have added to distress to Ms X and to Y caused by the delay in finding suitable accommodation.
65. However, the Council did subsequently arrange additional direct payments so that Ms X could have more support with Y while recovering. This went some way to resolving the need for support.

Communication

66. Miss X complained that the Council was untruthful when she questioned why accommodation via Care Provider A could not be pursued. I found the Council did not properly explain the situation. In response to a query from Miss X it stated Care Provider A could not source accommodation. This was in direct contrast to what the Care Provider had said to Miss X. It was not accurate. Care Provider could source accommodation, however, Care Provider A was not an approved provider and its terms required an assurance that the Council would pay rent at the property at times when it was possible it could be empty which the Council could not do. The Council was entitled to decline these terms, but it should have explained the situation clearly to Miss X. This was only properly explained when the Council responded to our enquiries. This was fault.
67. As I state in paragraph 63, I found that the Council’s explanation of the process could have been clearer.

Direct payments for additional support hours

68. I note that the Council agreed to pay the additional hours of support provided following information Miss X provided and responded to her other queries. I found no fault in how the Council responded to the additional issues Miss X raised.

Back to top

Agreed action

69. Within four weeks of my final decision:
70. The Council should send a written apology to Miss X and to Y for the delay in finding accommodation, the short notice in placing Y in respite while Miss X recovered from her operation, the unsuitability of the respite placement and for the issues we found with communication.
71. To recognise the distress caused by the fault we identified at a stressful time for both Y and Miss Y the Council should pay them £400 each.
72. The Council should review the information available to service users and their representatives about the process for finding supported accommodation, the possible funding options and the differences in benefits payable in these circumstances.
73. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

74. There was fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman