Council made errors in how it made decisions about care package for young person, Ombudsman finds

The woman behind the complaint, Mrs X, complained that the council did not manage the transition from children’s services to adult social care for her daughter, Ms G, failed to meet Ms G’s identified needs when she finished education, and failed to communicate with Mrs X about the matter properly.

Mrs X said Ms G was only able to attend a day centre for one day a week for three months, instead of the three days a week agreed by the council, and she and her husband had to provide the transport.

Mrs X told the Ombudsman that Ms G’s wellbeing and development was negatively affected and Mrs X was caused “pain and expense” in transporting Ms G herself.

Considering the mother’s complaint, the Ombudsman found the council “made errors” in how it made its decisions about Ms G’s care package in 2024 and about how it communicated those decisions with Mrs X.

The report noted: “That was fault and the council accepts that it caused confusion and as a result Mrs X believed Ms G would be provided with a package of care consisting of three days at Centre 1 per week with transport.”

The Ombudsman noted that the council agreed in March 2024 that Ms G required three days of provision, one-to-one support and transport from July 2024.

The report said: “The council told Mrs X in July it would not fund transport as Ms G’s needs could have been met at Centre 2 locally. However, the record shows Centre 2 did not confirm it could meet Ms G’s needs until October 2024. So, at the time it decided not to provide transport, the Council did not know if Ms G’s needs could be met at Centre 2.

“When the Council reconsidered its decision in October it confirmed Ms G required three days of provision, one-to-one support and transport to Centre 1. On the balance of probabilities Ms G required that package of support for the interim period.”

The Ombudsman found that as a result of the fault identified, Ms G missed out on transport and two days provision per week from July to October 2024.

Meanwhile, the investigation found that when Mrs X transported Ms G to Centre 1 for one day a week between July and October, the council was “aware” Mrs X experienced her own health problems with limited ability to drive and had identified transport was required to avoid carer breakdown.

Therefore, the council’s fault caused Mrs X distress, pain and expense.

To remedy the injustice caused, the council was recommended to:

• write to Mrs X and Ms G and apologise for the injustice they were caused as a result of the council’s faults;
• make a symbolic payment to Ms G of £500 to recognise the impact of missing two days of social care provision between July and October 2024;
• make a symbolic payment to Mrs X of £500 to recognise the confusion, distress and impact on her health conditions caused by the council’s faults; and
• remind relevant council officers to ensure new care packages have been appropriately authorised prior to providing agreement to service users or their representatives.

Martin Samuels, executive director of adult care and community wellbeing at Lincolnshire County Council, said: “We accept the LGO’s findings, have made the recommended payment and are reviewing and updating our processes to ensure we get it right in future.”

Lottie Winson