Kent County Council (23 003 599)
Category : Adult care services > Assessment and care plan
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 16 Jul 2023
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs C’s complaint about the way the Council carried out Occupational Therapy assessments. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.
The complaint
- Mrs C complained Occupational Therapist (OT) assessments were not carried out properly and her physical and mental needs were not taken into consideration. Mrs C wants the Council to agree a Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) for a driveway to the front of her property so she can access vehicles safety.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- The Council explained the OT assessments were carried out by trained healthcare professionals and explained what adaptations and support it can provide to assist Mrs C to access her driveway to the rear of her property.
- Mrs C’s local council had refused a vehicle crossover to the front of the property because it said Mrs C has a driveway to the rear of the property which she can access to get in and out of vehicles. The Council explained she would not be referred for a DFG for a front driveway for the same reasons. The Council explained it is not considered necessary for Mrs C to have a driveway in the front of her property as there is an accessible driveway at the rear of the property. It says there is on street parking at the front of the property enabling Mrs C to embark and disembark from vehicles. Whilst Mrs C disagrees with the OT assessments and wants to the Council to agree a DFG so she can have a driveway put in the front of her property, the Council has properly considered Mrs C’s mobility needs, her access in and out of her property, suggested adaptations to enable her to do this safely and explained why it will not consider a DFG. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. That is the case here.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mrs C’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman