Council failed to “adequately” manage young man’s transition from children’s to adult social care, Ombudsman finds

Following investigation, the council was recommended to pay a total of £3,750 to remedy the injustice caused.

The man behind the complaint, Mr X, complained to the Ombudsman that the council stopped his son Mr Y’s direct payments, and did not manage his transition from children to adult social care “adequately”.

He said this meant Mr Y missed out on activities and caused them avoidable distress.

Mr Y is a young man with learning disabilities, living with Mr X who is his main unpaid carer.

Mr Y’s 18th birthday was in September 2021. As a child in need, Mr Y received a direct payment (DP) which Mr X managed on his behalf. Mr X used the DP for clubs and activities for Mr Y to attend.

After analysing the timeline of events spanning from 2021 to 2025, the Ombudsman found a failure by the council to complete a child needs assessment before Mr Y’s 18th birthday to ensure any services he was entitled to as an adult were “identified and in place”.

The report observed: “This was not in line with section 58 of the Care Act 2014. It caused Mr X avoidable frustration and confusion about Mr Y’s entitlement to adult care and support.”

Mr Y’s children’s social care direct payment stopped when he turned 18. However, the Ombudsman clarified that it should have continued between September 2021 and March 2022 to be in line with section 17ZH of the Children Act 1989.

The Ombudsman said: “This caused a loss of services to which Mr Y had a legal entitlement. The Head of Service told officers the childrens DP should continue ‘for two months’, although this was not acted on and the two-month period was arbitrary: the DP should have continued until the adult social care assessment process was completed.”

Meanwhile, the Ombudsman observed that although the council noted Mr Y needed a fresh adult social care assessment in June 2023 as his education was ending shortly, an assessment did not take place until December 2023.

The Ombudsman said: “Taking six months to complete an assessment where there is a significant change in circumstances was not reasonable, appropriate, timely or in line with paragraph 6.24 of Care and Support Statutory Guidance. It delayed consideration of Mr Y’s eligibility and a decision on services and/or funding. This caused avoidable distress, confusion and uncertainty.”

Another aspect of Mr X’s complaint was related to the council’s funding panel rejecting the social worker’s recommendation for a DP to meet Mr Y’s eligible need for support to access community facilities. Instead, the panel offered possible alternative services to meet Mr Y’s eligible unmet needs.

On this point, the Ombudsman concluded: “While councils are entitled to discharge the legal duty to meet eligible needs by arranging universal or general services, it was fault of the council to close Mr Y’s case without ensuring those universal services were in place and actually delivering care and support to meet eligible unmet needs. The evidence available indicates universal services were unsuitable, could not meet needs or had no places available.

“Paragraph 10.25 of Care and Support Statutory Guidance stresses the duty to meet eligible needs is not discharged just because a person is entitled to a different service which could meet needs. Mr Y’s needs remained unmet and so the council had a duty to meet them. Mr Y has a loss of entitlement to regular support to enable him to access the community between January 2024 and April 2025.”

Finally, it was found that the council’s complaint responses failed to identify key areas of fault and injustice.

The Ombudsman noted: “The first response wrongly said Mr Y was not eligible for adult services, which was incorrect. He was eligible, but there was no requirement for care and support as his eligible needs were being met elsewhere (by Mr X and his education placement). Also, the Council’s complaint responses did not provide an adequate remedy.”

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

• Issue an apology to Mr X and Mr Y.
• Make payments of £750 to Mr X and £3,000 to Mr Y to reflect the avoidable distress, frustration, confusion and loss of services identified in the previous section. (To take into account lost social care provision between September 2021 - March 2022, and January 2024 - April 2025).
• Complete a review of procedures in children’s social care services to ensure those children receiving section 17 provision who appear to be in need of adult care and support are identified and receive child needs assessments in a timely manner (meaning: in good time before their 18th birthday).
• Issue a briefing note to relevant staff to ensure services provided under section 17 of the Children Act do not end at a child’s 18th birthday where they are likely to be entitled to adult social care and support and have not yet had an adult social care assessment.

Cllr Zena Brabazon, Cabinet Member for Children, Schools, and Families at the London Borough of Haringey said: “We deeply regret the distress and disruption this has caused. The findings of this report have been taken very seriously, and we have apologised for the impact this has had on this young person and their family.

“We accept that mistakes were made in the administrative process and the transition process should have taken place a lot earlier than what it did. We have since reviewed our systems and refined our transition processes to improve the level of service we deliver.

“We continue to strengthen our transition planning, bringing together families, education, health, and care professionals to ensure it is a coordinated approach.

“These improvements reflect our commitment to learning from the past and delivering a more inclusive, responsive service - one that puts young people at the centre and ensures they receive the support they deserve.”