The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complained the Council was refusing to meet his assessed care needs leaving him without appropriate support. The Council was not at fault. It carried out the agreed actions following a previous investigation, assessed Mr X’s needs and offered Mr X support which he declined.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council was refusing to meet his assessed care needs leaving him without appropriate support.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I have considered some initial information from the Council and have discussed the complaint with Mr X.
I gave Mr X and the Council the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments I received in reaching a final decision.
Background
In 2021 Mr X complained to us that the Council had failed to properly assess his care and support needs and had refused to adapt his bathroom.
We completed the investigation in January 2022. We explained we could not investigate the actions of his landlord in refusing to make adaptations to his property. We found some fault in how the Council planned to meet Mr X’s care needs, fault in how it had restricted how Mr X could contact the Council and that the Council delayed providing Mr X’s care. As a result, the Council agreed to: review Mr X’s care and support and produce a care and support plan, review its decision to restrict how Mr X could contact the Council, and make him a payment.
What happened Mr X’s social worker emailed him in January 2022. They advised Mr X that he had an assessed need of one hour of support per week to help him with paperwork. The Council had assessed Mr X could afford to contribute £95.02 to his care costs so Mr X would have to pay the full cost of £15.50 per week for his support. Mr X had previously decided to receive support once a fortnight to reduce the cost. The social worker explained they were still trying to source this support.
In January 2022 Mr X’s Housing Provider allocated Mr X a support worker to assist him with paperwork. This support is provided free of charge for one hour per week.
Mr X’s social worker arranged to meet with Mr X with the support worker and a charity representative in January 2022. Mr X did not want the social worker to attend the meeting. The social worker emailed Mr X and offered to visit with a colleague or to carry out a review by phone. Mr X refused the offer.
The team manager contacted Mr X in February 2022 to try and clarify his needs. Mr X declined the offer of a visit.
Mr X’s social worker emailed him later that month and advised Mr X they were referring him for an advocate and wanted to arrange to review his care needs. Mr X responded asking why they had not called him. The social worker telephoned Mr X. They noted he said he did not want them as a social worker, he raised his voice and that he discontinued the call.
The team manager contacted Mr X again in late February. Mr X agreed to a visit. The team manager visited Mr X in March 2022 to discuss the review of his care needs. They did not identify any new needs. They recorded Mr X’s main concerns were around cleaning and putting items of shopping away. They recorded he did not need any support with personal care. Mr X wanted support with learning to prepare meals and the team manager advised this sort of support could be obtained through evening classes.
The Council wrote to Mr X in March 2022. The letter confirmed the social worker had offered to speak to Mr X once a fortnight by telephone but he had refused this offer and they had agreed email was the most suitable way for him to communicate with Adult Social Care. The letter set out the Council would consider using its unreasonable or persistent complainants’ policy if officers continued to receive communication which could be considered abusive in nature. In March 2022 the Council also made the payment to Mr X as agreed in his previous complaint.
In April 2022 the Council identified a care provider to visit Mr X to provide one hour of support per week or fortnightly. The care provider arranged to visit Mr X but was unable to attend due to an emergency and advised Mr X of this. They therefore visited the next day. The care provider told the Council Mr X would not let them in, was abusive and refused support because it was not free. It considered care workers would be unsafe so it would not support Mr X. The Council asked Mr X how he wished to proceed.
In April the Council and advocate visited Mr X to review his care needs. Following this the Council emailed the support plan to Mr X. This set out Mr X was receiving support from a support worker from the Housing Provider to help with post and paperwork. He also received gardening support via a charity. Mr X was still struggling to manage his paperwork and the Council proposed one hour a week of support to supplement the support he received from his support worker and to assist with light household tasks. The support plan noted Mr X had declined the support already offered and so he was provided with details of private cleaners so he could arrange support himself. They noted Mr X could heat microwave meals and make some meals but wanted to learn to cook other meals. The support plan noted re-ablement was not appropriate to teach him to cook and this was best sought through adult learning. They noted Mr X was in dispute with his Housing Provider about getting a level access shower. A charity had agreed to install an over-bath shower if Mr X received the necessary permissions from the Housing Provider and Mr X already had a bath lift.
The Council has arranged to meet with Mr X, his advocate and his support worker from the Housing Provider in May 2022 to discuss how Mr X’s support can be provided. Mr X’s GP has also requested a multi-agency meeting to discuss Mr X’s needs.
Findings
I cannot investigate any matter already considered in Mr X’s previous complaint to us. Nor can I investigate any actions of Mr X’s Housing Provider.
The concerns Mr X has raised are the same as those we investigated previously. The Council has provided evidence to show it carried out the actions agreed following our previous investigation and there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. It wrote to Mr X and explained the agreed contact arrangements and that it may invoke its policy if Mr X was abusive to staff. It made the recommended payment and reviewed Mr X’s care and support needs. It has also arranged for Mr X to receive advocacy support.
Mr X is currently receiving support from a support worker employed by his Housing Provider. They are also supporting Mr X should he wish to apply for alternative accommodation. There was a delay in the Council meeting with Mr X to review his care needs but this was not due to Council fault. Mr X initially declined offers to review his care needs. The Council has carried out a review and involved an advocate. It arranged a support package of one visit a week to provide further support with paperwork and light household cleaning support. Mr X refused to accept the support as he was unwilling to pay a contribution for this.
Mr X refused the support arranged by the Council as he considered it should be free. The Council is entitled to charge for the care services it provides. It must do so in line with the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014. Charges may only cover the cost the Council incurs. The Council assessed Mr X’s contribution and has explained he will need to pay £15.50 per week for the support provided. There is no evidence of fault by the Council.
The Council is looking to meet with other parties to discuss the way forward. This is appropriate.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation as there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman