Ombudsman and council in standoff over £60,000-plus payment

The Local Government Ombudsman and a local authority are at loggerheads over a recommendation that the council pay out more than £60,000 to a man forced to become a full-time carer for his wife.

The LGO made the recommendation in a report issued in May 2013 into the treatment of the man, who gave up his job and career. His wife had severe mental health problems and required 24-hour care and supervision.

Between March 2008 and April 2010 Shropshire provided direct payments to the wife to employ her husband for 50 hours a week.

However, the LGO’s investigation found that the council was guilty of maladministration causing injustice in that it did not carry out a formal assessment of her needs. The authority also failed to assess the husband’s needs as a carer and provide sufficient funds for the woman’s care.

The care package was based on how the husband could be assisted to work full-time and care for his wife. This produced an ad hoc method of establishing how to meet her needs, the Ombudsman said.

The husband claimed he lost his job, pension contributions and career prospects as a result of the inaction of the council.

The LGO recommended that Shropshire:

• Pay the complainant £61,270 in recognition of the care he provided which was not funded by the council at the appropriate time;
• Provide an apology to the couple about the time that it took to deal with the complaint;
• Review its procedure for complaints handling in light of comments made in the report; and
• Pay a further £1,000 for the time and trouble in making the complaint.

The Ombudsman said today (16 January) that it was taking “the rare step” of issuing a further report because the council had failed to agree to make the payment. (The council had accepted the other recommendations).

The LGO's second report reveals that a meeting of Shropshire’s councillors in July 2013 voted in support of an officer’s report challenging the recommended £61,270 payment.

The council told the Ombudsman that the payment was “wholly disproportionate to the needs of the case” and that the LGO’s report had “failed to take account” of the “unusual circumstances” of the case.

These circumstances, it said, included not carrying out an assessment as the wife was resistant to the idea and agreeing care to be provided 24/7.

The council has proposed that the husband instead “be entitled to his loss of earnings less any payments he has received in respect of the care he has given to [his wife]”.

The LGO rejected this counter-proposal, in part because it would be difficult to discover what the husband’s losses were in relation to employment. The Ombudsman also said the “overwhelming” evidence was that the wife needed 24-hour care.

While accepting that relations between the council and the wife were strained, the LGO said she had co-operated with other professional assessments. The woman’s degree of co-operation did not absolve the council of its duty to carry out an assessment.

In the further report, the Ombudsman said: “My [original] report highlighted the Council poorly handled Mrs Ryan’s complaint when it began in 2010, a conclusion it accepts. It compounds that poor handling now by seeking to re-open points it has made before, making untested allegations against [the wife] and introducing arguments irrelevant to my investigation.”

Dr Jane Martin, Local Government Ombudsman, said: “Public services must ultimately be accountable to the people that use them, through democratically elected councillors. Members of Shropshire Council should now give careful consideration to the contents of my further report.

"If the public cannot have confidence that injustices will be remedied it will significantly undermine their trust in both public services and in their elected representatives.”

The LGO’s recommendations are not legally binding. However, under the Local Government Act the Ombudsman has the power to issue further reports where authorities have not complied withrecommendations.

Cllr Lee Chapman, Cabinet member for adult services at Shropshire, said: “We are considering the Ombudsman report which will go to a meeting of full council in due course.”