By Edward Trower
Bromley Council wrongly left a mother to support her son, after cutting her support package, an Ombudsman investigation has concluded.The ombudsman concluded that the man who suffers from autism, and his mother, had received care support from the council, including one-to-one care, transport costs and a placement in a care centre.
However, Bromley Council decided to cut the level of the man’ssupport at short notice, without reassessing his needs. This left the man and his mother without support during the holidays. The man and his mother’s identity has been withheld for legal reasons. He is referred to as mr N, for the purpose of this report.
Mr N had a care package, arranged in 2013, whilst in residential college placement. It was based on 14 weeks of holiday care during which he was supported at home. He also attended a day care facility.
When he was placed outside the council’s area, The council reneged on its agreement to provide his care package whilst he was in a college placement in 2013. The package included 14 weeks of holiday care during which he was supported at home. They agreed to provide Ms M with travel assistance, so she could pick up and take the man home for holidays. The needs were assessed as 28.5 hours of one to one support, and three days each week of specialist day care.A small additional payment, included the provision of insurance on her home to employ carers.
In October 2015, the council began paying for 25 hours of one to one support, rather than the agreed 28.5 hours. This was despite the fact that there had been no reassessment of the man’s needs since the original care package was agreed.The Ombudsman concluded that Bromley Council failed to warn her about the reduction, and failed to give her an explanation when she inquired about the change. This left the mother having to provide the rest of the one to one care herself. Bromley Council acted disgracefully in their failure to follow correct and professional procedures. The Ombudsman’s investigation revealed that during the same period, the day care center the man attended closed, and no alternative support was identified. Bromley council failed to pay the man the equivalent of this care, meaning Ms M could not source provision that was broadly similar.
Investigations by the Ombudsman revealed a discrepancy between accounts given by the Council and the claims of the aggrieved family. Bromley Council stopped payments to the family between July 2014 and December 2015, claiming that the mother had not provided invoices. Contradicting their claim, the distressed mother stated that she was never asked for invoices before this happened.
However, Bromley Council admitted that despite stopping payment for 17 months, backdated payments should be made from 23 October 2015.
Upon this realization, Bromley Council made a payment to Ms M but placed the money in a ‘holding account’ so Ms M could not use it at the time.This left the man without financial support during the 2016 Easter holidays. The council shamefully admitted this to have been an error.Making matters worse was the fact that even when the council did pay the family for the care, the money they received was not paid in consistent amounts, or at fixed times.
DISTRESS
Bromley Council defended its actions by stating that reduction in hours were conducted with the mother’s agreement, however, the ombudsman said that “changes in care should be based on needs” and the man’s needs were not assessed at this time.
The ombudsman added that Bromley council had not “provided any evidence to justify the reduction” in payments for 28.5 hours of one to one support . It concluded that the failure to provide this support amounted to a fault. The Ombudsman further reprimanded the council should have carried out a review a year after July 2013 to establish whether Mr N’s needs had changed.It added that Ms M had been caused “trouble and distress” in providing additional care to Mr N and trying to resolve the matter with the council.
In regard to the delayed payments, the ombudsman accepted this was “an administrative error”, but said the council should review its use of holding accounts, so money is swiftly accessible once it is sent.
COMPENSATION
Bromley council have apologise for their negligence and agreed to pay the family £2,865 to compensate them for the distress caused.
The Council promised to ensure an annual review of care and support, as well as to pay money periodically for a fixed period at specific times and in specific amounts. The local authority also agreed to review its use of ‘holding accounts’ so emergency money sent to individuals is immediately accessible.A council spokesperson said: “We acknowledge there was an administrative error in this case and apologise for any inconvenience caused.”“We are currently reviewing the whole area of care charges and the information supplied to service users and their families.”
“In addition, there have been significant improvements to the complaints handling process, including a major upgrade to the bespoke IT system used, which means the council is confident that such a situation is highly unlikely to recur.”
“Families with significant care needs like this rely on the right support being provided in the right way, and at the right time. Councils cannot change care packages at short notice and without making the proper assessments,” the ombudsman, Michael King, said.“I am pleased Bromley council has agreed to my recommendations to improve its services and welcome the changes it will now put in place.”