Ombudsman criticises council after finding woman was unable to spend as much time with dying husband after he was moved to “cheaper” care placement

A woman was not able to spend as much time as she wanted with her husband in his final weeks because Essex County Council moved him to a care placement further away from the family home, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found.

The Ombudsman’s investigation revealed that the council decided to move the man, who had dementia, to a care home 40 minutes away because it was a “cheaper option” when his needs changed.

He had previously been in a care home close to his wife.

Following the move, she could no longer visit as often as she liked. The man died six weeks after moving to the new home.

The Ombudsman investigated and concluded that the council moved the man without following a “best interests” decision process, and did not provide a full explanation in writing of its decision to refuse a different accommodation option which the man’s wife preferred.

Further, when the woman complained, the move was not put on hold until it responded to her complaint.

The Ombudsman also found the local authority failed to “fully explore” the option of the man remaining in the care home he was originally placed in, with his wife paying top-up fees to enable him to do so.

The report observed: “The council did not carry out an assessment of the wife’s finances to allow her to make an informed decision about the viability of this arrangement.”

Lastly, the investigation found the council did not consider the impact the move might have on the couple’s human rights and their right to private and family life.

To remedy the injustice caused, Essex has agreed to apologise to the woman and pay her £500, in addition to £500 it had already offered her for its failings within the complaint handling process.

It also agreed to take a number of actions within six months of the report including issuing a reminder to front line Adult Social Care staff and their managers of:

• the duty to take best interest decisions when deciding care arrangements for people who do not have mental capacity and what the process should involve;
• the right process to follow for a person who has deprivation of liberty safeguards in place before moving them to a different residential care setting;
• councils’ duties when a person who is deprived of their liberty does not have a relevant person’s representative; and
• the importance of having regard to a person’s right to private and family life when they are vulnerable and do not have mental capacity to decide about their care.

Essex will review its process for considering top up payments to ensure that when the person expresses interest in this option they are provided with the relevant information and the council offers a financial assessment for them.

It will also ensure that when deciding to place a person in a residential care setting which is not their preference, the council sends a letter with a full explanation of its reasons for refusing the individual’s preferred accommodation.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, Amerdeep Somal, said: “This is a distressing case where a couple have been separated in the days and weeks leading up to a man’s passing.

“While I cannot say that the move would not have happened had the council followed the proper procedures, the wife has been left distressed not knowing whether things could have turned out differently.

“The council chose to move the man even while his wife was raising her concerns about the impact this would have, and she has told me she felt ignored and not respected throughout the process. Sadly, this was avoidable distress that she endured due to how the council managed the situation.”

She added: “The council has agreed to my recommendations to improve its service – I hope this will ensure relatives’ voices are heard when making decisions which affect their loved ones.”

A spokesperson for Essex County Council said: "We are not able to comment on individual cases. However, we acknowledge the Ombudsman’s recommendations and are committed to implementing them.”

Lottie Winson