Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to provide him with refresher mobility training when he asked for it in September 2022. Based on the evidence seen so far, despite identifying eligible care needs, the Council failed to produce a care and support plan for Mr X explaining how it would meet them. This has left him without the support he needs. The Council needs to apologise, produce a care and support plan and make a symbolic payment to him.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council failed to provide him with refresher mobility training when he asked for it in September 2022.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• discussed the complaint with Mr X;
• considered the documents the Council has provided;
• considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies; and
• invited comments on a draft of this statement from Mr X and the Council, for me to consider before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

5. Mr X is registered blind. The Council’s Sensory Team provided mobility training in April/May 2019.
6. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman about the failure to provide him with refresher mobility training in 2020. In September 2021, we found fault with the Council for failing to refer him for an assessment of his needs under the Care Act 2014.
7. In November 2021 the Council sent Mr X an updated copy of his assessment, having removed some sections he had objected to. It asked him if he was “willing to consider a DP PA as another option”. It appears the Council was proposing a direct payment (DP) so Mr X could employ and personal assistant (PA). The Council said this may be an alternative to voluntary services but would involve a financial assessment.
8. Mr Y did not respond to the Council’s e-mail until 7 January 2022. He asked about the Carers’ Hub and said guide training for carers would be good. He did not respond to the question about "a DP PA".
9. On 18 May Mr X told the Council its Sensory Team had still not contacted him. He said he knew of two other people who had not been able to get mobility training.
10. In July Mr X told the Council he had been out with a volunteer from a Mutual Aid Group and would welcome their presence while practising his route to the tube station. He exchanged e-mails with the Council about the lack of accessible information about charges. It arranged to post a document to him which he would not have been able to read. It then offered to send an officer from the Finance team to complete the financial assessment form with him. When Mr X contacted the Finance Team it told him he did not need a financial assessment as he did not access services. He said he did not expect the Sensory Team to provide mobility training, so was working with the Mutual Aid Group. He said provided he reached his destination he was happy.
11. The Council completed an assessment of Mr X’s needs in July. The assessment said he had eligible needs under the Care Act, as he could not achieve these outcomes:
• making use of necessary facilities or services in the community;
• maintaining a habitable home;
• managing and maintaining nutrition;
• being appropriately clothed; and
• being able to make use of your home safely.
12. The assessment said Mr X was managing his daily tasks and did not need support with them. Other information in the assessment suggesed this was because of support from his wife. The assessment said Mr X wanted support to access the community. The Council told him any support it provided would be subject to a financial assessment and if he had savings over £23,250 he would have to pay for it in full. It said information on direct payments had been provided but declined.
13. Mr X said he wanted someone to help him into the community so he could regain his confidence and independence, which had declined because of COVID-19 lockdowns. He told the Council:
• he was having problems navigating roads in his local area;
• simply walking the route with someone would not develop his mobility skills, so he needed someone trained to help people develop those skills;
• about the problems he had experienced when out in the community; and
• he was taking taxis to the tube, to avoid walking in his local area.
14. After the assessment, the Council contacted Charity A and referred Mr X to Charity B about support accessing the community. Mr X said Charity B could provide someone to walk with him but charged for this. He said he did not want to pay for support from someone who had not received sighted guide training. The Council again noted that information on direct payments had been sent to Mr X, so he could employ a personal assistant to help him in the community, but he declined this. Mr X says he disputed this claim and asked the Council to provide evidence to support it, but did not receive a response.
15. Mr X told the Council he wanted to self-refer to the Sensory Team for mobility training. The Council noted it had taught Mr X the route to his local station several times and could not continue to teach the same route repeatedly. Mr X later asked the Council to explain how the Sensory Team was supposed to work.
16. In September the Council referred Mr X to its Sensory Team.
17. In October Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to respond. When it replied to his complaint in November, the Council said:
• it had passed his request for mobility training on to its Sensory Team;
• the Sensory Team could not offer further mobility training because he had previously completed mobility training and the issue had been investigated previously;
• it had recently assigned a social worker to Mr X who had offered him a direct payment, but he had turned this down; and
• if Mr X accepted a direct payment, he could use it to employ his own mobility trainer.
18. In December Mr X made a subject access request which included 40 questions about his contact with the Council and its responses.
19. When the Council replied in January 2023, it answered most of his questions apart from those which it said:
• were not within the scope of a subject access request; and
• had been dealt with via the complaints process, including his complaint to the Ombudsman (see paragraph 6 above).
20. According to the Council’s website, its Sensory Team provides up to six-weeks of route-based mobility training for visually impaired people. It does not provide “ongoing mobility or independent living skills training”.
21. When I asked Mr X if he would be happy to have direct payments to employ a personal assistant to provide mobility training, he said he was not sure what they were. He also said he could not find anyone who could provide such training.

Is there evidence of fault by the Council which caused injustice?

22. Under section 8 of the Care Act 2014, councils can meet eligible needs in different ways, including by providing:
• care and support at home or in the community;
• by providing information, advice and advocacy.
23. They can meet needs by:
• arranging for a person other than it to provide a service (e.g. a care agency or a charity);
• by itself providing a service;
• by making direct payments (so the person can arrange their own service);
24. Under the Care and Support (Eligibility Criteria) Regulations 2015, councils must consider if a person is unable to achieve two or more of these outcomes:
• manage and maintain nutrition;
• maintain personal hygiene;
• manage toilet needs;
• be appropriately clothed;
• maintain a habitable home environment;
• make use of the home safely;
• develop and maintain family or other personal relationships;
• access and engage in work, training, education or volunteering;
• make use of necessary facilities or services in the local community, including public transport and recreational facilities or services;
• carry out any caring responsibilities for a child.
25. Provided not being able to achieve two or more of these outcomes would have a significant impact on the person’s wellbeing, they have eligible needs for care and support. The Council has a duty to meet eligible care needs and should produce a care and support plan explaining how it will meet them.
26. The Council accepts Mr X has eligible needs for care and support. It therefore has a duty to meet those needs. It should have produced a care and support plan explaining how his needs would be met. The failure to do so was fault by the Council. It appears support from his wife meets Mr X’s need for support with daily living tasks. The only outstanding need appears to be the need for support accessing the community. Mr X has asked for short term support relearning the skills needed to access his local community, which he lost during the COVID-19 lockdowns.
27. The Council explored the possibility of meeting that need by referring Mr X to a charity, but Mr X explained that a volunteer who had not been trained how to teach a blind person the necessary skills could not meet his need. The Council was prepared to offer a direct payment so Mr X could employ a personal assistant. It appears Mr X did not understand what the Council was offering, possibly because it used abbreviations which were not familiar to him. Mr X also says he has been unable to find anyone to provide the training he needs. The Council’s duty to meet Mr X’s need remains but it has failed to fulfil that duty. If its Sensory Team does not provide refresher training, the Council will have to arrange for someone else to meet that need.

Back to top

Agreed action

28. I recommended the Council:
• within four weeks:
1. produces a care and support plan for Mr X setting it how it is going to meet his needs;
2. writes to Mr X apologising for the failure to provide the support he needs; and
3. pays him £150 for the time and trouble he has been put to in pursuing his complaint;
• within eight weeks:
1. takes action to ensure officers produce care and support plans when they identify eligible needs for care and support; and
2. reviews the information available for blind people on direct payments and financial assessments to make sure it is suitable for their needs.
29. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation and the basis there has been fault by the Council casing injustice which requires a remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman