A judge has found Cardiff council responsible for an "appalling" breach of its legal responsibilities to a disabled 23-year-old man it removed from a care placement where he had been happy. The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had previously attended Elidyr Communities Trust, a specialist residential college in Carmarthenshire, for a number of years.
In a damning ruling, Mrs Justice Steyn said it was "frankly astonishing" the council had failed to take the urgency of the situation seriously or comply with court rulings ordering it to act. She said the contents of her judgement "shame Cardiff City Council" and said she would wait to decide on further punishment to see if the council apologised and what efforts it took to comply with orders to care for the man.
In a statement, Cardiff council said it would be writing to the man's family to apologise formally and said it "fully accepts that mistakes were made". The High Court sitting in Cardiff had heard that the council had withdrawn funding for the autistic man's care at Elidyr Communities Trust but had not put in an effective care and support plan.
The court heard they wanted to move him from the residential college into supported accommodation, but had not yet identified a placement that was suitable and/or available. Over a period of two years, Cardiff City Council failed to draw up a lawful care plan.
The man, who can only be known as JS, was represented by his mother who is identified in proceedings as KS. The family are from Cardiff. She said she began negotiating with Cardiff Council in 2019 after she was made aware he would be removed from the trust and placed in adult care provision.
Read more: Plans approved for new train station in east Cardiff with 15-storey office towers
She said: "I was hopeful at the start, I thought 'they're [Cardiff Council] going to listen, we're going to have a dialogue, we're going to decide between us what's best for him'. I became his personal welfare deputy in the court of protection because I thought that means I can speak on his behalf - but I hoped it would never resort to having to use the deputyship. I thought we could reach an agreement between us.
"But sadly as time went on it became more and more obvious to me that the council had an idea in mind of where they wanted to place him. Everything I was saying was just ignored, I was sidelined. It became increasingly fraught and stressful. So much that I ended up going to my solicitors. It has been extremely stressful. I have tried to keep as much as I could from my son because he is severely disabled," she said.
KS said she felt "ignored" by the council throughout the proceedings and said she felt "they had their own preconceived ideas as to where they were going to place him", adding: "I might as well have not bothered."
In August 2020, an independent assessor upheld a complaint by JS’s mother in relation to Cardiff City Council’s care plan – stating that Cardiff City Council’s planning was “too little, too late” and “completely wrong”. That outcome was not heeded by Cardiff City Council. That led to a claim for judicial review being issued and settled by way of consent order in July 2021, whereby Cardiff City Council agreed to a timetable which would lead to a completion of future care planning.
Cardiff City Council breached the terms of the timetable and consent order and JS ended up living at home with his mother, KS, whilst waiting for the council to identify a suitable placement. As a result, in November 2021 a further claim was issued. Judge Lambert granted an interim injunction on the papers, describing Cardiff City Council’s conduct as “appalling”.
At a final hearing before Judge Keyser QC in December 2021, Cardiff City Council conceded that it was failing to meet JS’s needs and it has failed to implement a care plan. Judge Keyser QC granted a final injunction which compelled Cardiff City Council to complete future placement planning by January 7, 2022.
Cardiff City Council breached that injunction and KS applied to initiate proceedings for contempt of court. In a judgment on April 1 2022 Mrs Justice Steyn found to the criminal standard of proof that Cardiff City Council had breached HHJ Keyser QC’s Order and were in contempt of court. The high court judge accepted the submission made by Christian Howells from Watkins & Gunn solicitors on behalf of JS that the “sole justifiable outcome” was now a mandatory order that Cardiff City Council “take all necessary steps” to ensure that JS started back at Elidyr Communities Trust at the beginning of the summer term. Cardiff City Council were also ordered to pay indemnity costs.
Mrs Justice Steyn said that it was “quite impossible” to accept that Cardiff City Council had made every effort to obtain staff to enable JS to return to Elidyr Communities Trust at any earlier point, in circumstances where they accepted that they were not meeting JS’s needs.
KS said that when her son was first removed from the Elidyr Communities Trust she was asked to consider a number of accommodations which would be suitable. She said, "I wasn't satisfied that what they were offering was in any way suitable for my son. So I was battling to keep him where he was. I was expected to say ‘yeah that suits my son’ when he had a perfectly good placement where he’s happy and they did not want to send him back there for reasons best known to themselves."
As a result of being taken out of the trust, and due to the delay in re-homing JS, despite the court decision there is now no space for him to return to the trust. His mother said: "They’ve caused all sorts of havoc now because he has lost his place there. It has been an absolute shambles basically. It wasn’t my choice whatsoever. The council has made it extremely difficult for me but more importantly my son.
"And as a result of their absolute shambolic approach to this whole matter, the provider couldn’t then provide for him because the council decided too late in the day that he could go back. We have been left high and dry. We have been very much failed by the local authority.
"There are lots of opportunities there for him there, there’s a full structured timetable, lots of encouragement, and I think he deserves that. He’s disabled, doesn't mean he deserves less of a life than someone who is non-disabled. I feel so strongly now that disabled people are being pushed to the back of the queue and ignored and there is so much richness from engaging with the disabled community and they can contribute so much."
Since being removed from the trust, JS has moved in with his mother. She says that she has tried to shield him from the stress of the proceedings but that the move has undoubtedly affected him. "It has been stressful and has had a knock-on effect - not just on me but on my daughter who is an amazing carer for her brother - and all the family who have had to step in at various times," she said.
"I’ve tried to keep as much from him as he has been diagnosed with extreme anxiety. I say to him 'mum’s looking after JS, keeping him safe' when he mentions going back to college. He hasn’t got the capacity to understand. He doesn’t understand the world around him to a large degree. I try and keep a routine for him as much as possible, keep the language simple, make sure he gets enough exercise, trying to be as good a mum as I can be.
"I’m trying my damndest to provide support for him alongside my daughter, and like I say the support network we are a part of is great. But really where he was was absolutely ideal for him and it was meeting his needs. His needs are not being met here in Cardiff like they were where he was. It just seems as though there has been a hammer blow taken to his provision for no good reason as far as I can see."
A Cardiff Council spokesperson said: “The council fully accepts that mistakes were made in this extremely complex case and is determined to do everything possible to rectify the situation for JS and his family. We have been working to find a long-term solution to fully meet JS’s assessed care needs. We funded care at home as an interim measure and put forward a longer term option to the court that we considered met JS’s needs. We recognise that this has taken longer than we would have wished, and therefore accept the court’s criticism regarding the delay. The availability of suitable placements to meet specific needs has been significantly impacted by the pandemic, and combined with the national shortage of care staff has prevented specialist providers from offering the range of provision that previously would have been available.
“The Judgment has set out a specific set of requirements and we will do in all in our power to comply with its terms. Meanwhile, we will continue to work with JS and his family to find the right option, and will be writing shortly to apologise formally for the delays they have experienced”.
