Supreme Court: Councils cannot take finances into account when assessing social care needs

Published by Jon Land for 24dash.com in Housing and also in Health, Legal, Local Government

A Supreme Court judgement handed down today ruled that councils may not take their finances into account when assessing the needs of people for social care.

In the case of KM v Cambridgeshire CC, a blind, autistic, wheelchair user was offered a care package that he argued did not meet his needs sufficiently.

 As part of the case, a leading public lawyer at Irwin Mitchell representing four national charities (Sense, National Autistic Society, RNIB and Guide Dogs) sought to clarify whether a local authority can take their financial resources into account when they are assessing someone’s needs.

Although the court ruled against KM, the judgement has made it clear that “resources are not to be taken into account” when establishing the needs of disabled people. Some councils restricted assessments on the grounds of costs and some did not, which in the past resulted in a postcode lottery for social care.

The court also made it clear that when social care support is provided by direct payments to the individual it is “crucial” that local authorities provide “a reasonable degree of detail so that a judgement can be made whether the indicative sum is too high, too low or about right.”  

Yogi Amin, Partner in the Public Law team at Irwin Mitchell, representing the four charities, said: “This is potentially the biggest community care ruling in 15 years. Although KM’s appeal has not been successful, we are pleased that the Supreme Court has now clarified the law with regard to local authorities taking their resources into account when assessing a disabled person’s needs.

“Each of the national charities who intervened in this case firmly believes that a person’s individual needs are the same regardless of where they live and have campaigned tirelessly to ensure there is complete transparency in terms of what an individual’s care needs are. They also argued for clarity over what is delivered in a care package – that also was an issue the Law Lords clarified and supported.”

All four organisations were united in their bid to clarify a previous ruling in 1997 by the House of Lords which suggested that the resources of a local authority may be taken into account when determining the care needs of individuals.

The charities argued that the law has been misinterpreted and that each individual should be assessed in the first instance in terms of what care they need, rather than the local authority’s financial position.

Mark Lever, Chief Executive of The National Autistic Society, said: “The fact that Court recognised the assessment for social care should not be based on a ‘computer says so’ system is an important step forward. This sends a clear message to all local authorities that they have a duty of care to be transparent about how they assess and allocate funds to disabled people whether they live in Liverpool or Luton.

“The case highlights the complexity of the current social care system and the need for the Government to stop delaying in their reforms and put an end to the care crisis.”