Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed allocating a social worker to him. He also complained about the Council’s communication with him and that the Council delayed carrying out a review of his care and support plan. Mr X says the Council’s actions caused him avoidable distress. We found fault by the Council and the Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council delayed allocating a social worker to him. He also complained about the Council’s communication with him and that the Council delayed carrying out a review of his care and support plan. Mr X says the Council’s actions caused him avoidable distress and frustration. He would like the Council to provide him with an apology and a financial remedy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(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 discussed the complaint with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
6. I made enquiries to the Council and considered the information it provided.
7. Mr X and the Council have had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I have considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Care Act 2014 and care assessments

8. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require councils to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to everyone regardless of their finances or whether the council thinks the person has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and where suitable their carer or any other person they might want involved.
9. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). 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. When preparing a care and support plan the council must involve any carer the adult has.
10. Section 27 of the Care Act 2014 says councils should keep care and support plans under review. Government 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. They should carry out reviews as quickly as is reasonably practicable in a timely manner proportionate to the needs to be met.

What happened

11. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
12. Mr X had a care and support plan which the Council reviewed in April 2022. The Council produced a care and support plan in December 2022 which stated Mr X should receive help with his shopping every week.
13. In February 2023, the Council contacted Mr X regarding his concerns about the de-cluttering of his property and a previous complaint. The Council said a social worker who was allocated to Mr X previously, was no longer working for the Council. It said the Council would allocate a new social worker to Mr X for the future, but in the interim, the Council’s Duty Team would provide any necessary support.
14. Mr X contacted the Council in March 2023 to ask for an update regarding the allocation of a new social worker. Mr X said he had not heard anything further regarding this since the Council’s contact from the previous month.
15. Mr X emailed the Council again in May 2023 and said he had not received a reply to his email from March. Mr X asked the Council to update him regarding the allocation of a social worker.
16. The Council contacted Mr X on 7 June 2023. The Council confirmed it would look at allocating a new social worker the following week to review Mr X’s care and support plan.
17. The Council contacted Mr X again on 19 June 2023 and confirmed it was allocating a new social worker to him. The Council said the new social worker had been off work but was due to return in a few days. The Council said it would ask the social worker to contact him when they returned to work.
18. Mr X emailed the Council on 30 June 2023 and said the new social worker had not yet contacted him. The Council replied on the same day to confirm a new social worker had been allocated to him to carry out a review of his care and support plan.

Mr X’s complaint

19. Mr X complained to the Council on 7 July 2023 as he said he had still not heard from the new social worker.
20. The Council emailed Mr X on the same day and apologised for the delay. The social worker also called Mr X and apologised for the delay. The social worker agreed to contact an advocacy service to assist Mr X with the review process.
21. A few weeks later, the social worker emailed Mr X to tell him the advocacy service was unable to provide support with the care needs review. Mr X told the social worker he agreed for them to approach another advocacy service instead.
22. On 8 August 2023, the Council provided its complaint response. It said it had allocated a new social worker to Mr X on 21 June 2023 but due to their working arrangements and workload, there had been a delay in them contacting Mr X. The Council apologised for the delay.
23. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and brought his complaint to us.

What happened next

24. The Council contacted a second advocacy service on behalf of Mr X; however, the advocacy service told the Council Mr X was not eligible for Care Act advocacy.
25. The Council carried out a review of Mr X’s care and support plan in October 2023. A representative from a third-party organisation was also present at the review meeting. Mr X says the representative was present to advise about the service offered by the third-party organisation and was not present in the capacity of an advocate.
26. The Council’s review decided Mr X was no longer eligible for a package of care.

Analysis

27. Mr X complained the Council delayed allocating a social worker to him. The Council says a social worker was allocated to Mr X until January 2023 when their involvement with Mr X ended and the social worker left the Council. The Council says it did not allocate a new social worker immediately because it had no outstanding tasks, and the review of Mr X’s care and support plan was not due at that time.
28. I have reviewed the Council’s records regarding the contact from Mr X and the Council’s actions regarding the allocation of a social worker. The evidence shows a delay in the Council’s allocation of a social worker in time to carry out a review of Mr X’s care and support plan. This is because the Council’s last review of the care and support plan was carried out in April 2022. As per the Care and Support Statutory Guidance, the Council should have carried out a further review within 12 months of this date, (April 2023). The Council did not allocate a social worker to Mr X until June 2023; this contributed to the delay in carrying out the review of the care and support plan within the timeframe specified by the statutory guidance.
29. The Council carried out the review in October 2023. I acknowledge part of the delay was impacted by the Council’s attempts to obtain an advocate at the request of Mr X. However, the records show the Council did not start the process of looking for an advocate until July 2023, three months after the review was due.
30. The Council acknowledges there was a delay in undertaking the review. It says that due to service pressures and worker availability, it was not able to allocate a social worker to Mr X as quickly as it would like.
31. It is positive the Council has itself identified the delay and I acknowledge the Council’s comments regarding the reasons for this. Nevertheless, the statutory guidance is clear that reviews of care and support plans should be carried out at least every 12 months. As a result, the delay incurred by the Council regarding this matter constitutes service failure amounting to fault. This fault caused avoidable distress and frustration to Mr X.

The Council’s communication with Mr X

32. Mr X says the Council incurred delays in its communication with him. The Council’s records show Mr X contacted it in March 2023 to request an update regarding the allocation of a social worker. Mr X contacted the Council again in June 2023 as he says he did not receive a reply. In addition, Mr X says the social worker delayed making contact after they were allocated to him in June 2023.
33. As part of its complaint response, the Council acknowledged the delay in contacting Mr X after it allocated a social worker to him. However, the evidence shows the Council also incurred delays in responding to Mr X’s requests for an update. This delay is fault causing avoidable frustration and distress to Mr X.
34. It is positive the Council acknowledged and apologised for the delay regarding contact from the social worker once they were allocated. However, the Council’s complaint response does not fully address Mr X’s previous requests for an update or the delay in carrying out the review.

Back to top

Agreed action

35. To address the injustice identified, the Council has agreed to take the following actions within one month of the final decision:
1. Provide an apology to Mr X for the distress caused by the delay in carrying out the review of his care and support plan, and for the delay in its communications with him. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings;
2. Make a symbolic payment of £150 in recognition of the distress and frustration caused by the delays identified, and
3. Remind staff to adhere to the Care and Support Statutory Guidance, specifically regarding the undertaking of care and support plan reviews at least every 12 months.
36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I have found fault by the Council causing an injustice to Mr X and the Council has agreed to take the above action to resolve Mr X’s complaint. I have therefore concluded my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman