The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about meeting adult social care needs. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council has assessed how best to meet the person’s care needs. The person disagrees with the decision and wants a different provision, but the Ombudsman cannot question or criticise the decision when there is not fault in the decision-making process.
The complaint
Mr B says the Council has denied his son, Mr C, a supported living place. Mr B says the Council officers making the decisions do not know Mr C well enough, and those that do know him should be more involved and fighting his case. Mr B says an officer involved in the issues of complaint also responded to it. Mr B and Mr C have lost trust in the officers supporting them, they would like a new care co-ordinator and to feel listened to.
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 impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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 is responsible to assess Mr C’s adult social care needs, and to meet any eligible needs. The Ombudsman cannot tell the Council how to meet Mr C’s needs, we can only look at whether the Council followed the correct process under the Care Act 2014 and associated statutory guidance to assess and meet needs in accordance with any care and support plan.
This complaint is a dispute between Mr C and the Council about how best to meet his needs. Mr C wants to live in a 24-hour supported living accommodation. The Council has completed an assessment in accordance with the Care Act, undertaken by a suitable professional, and including Mr C and Mr B’s views. The Council has assessed Mr C does not need 24-hour supported living accommodation so will not offer it, even though it is Mr C’s preference. The Council has offered semi-independent accommodation, in accordance with its assessment of how to meet Mr C’s needs.
I understand Mr C’s disappointment because the Council’s decision is not what he was hoping for. The Council’s decision is based on a properly completed assessment of Mr C’s needs, so the Ombudsman cannot say the Council’s decision is wrong.
Mr B is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman