Two severely disabled adults have won a landmark high court battle over cost-cutting by Isle of Wight local authority when a judge ruled that the council’s plans to reduce its adult social care budget are unlawful.
Mrs Justice Lang, sitting in London, said: “The defendant [council’s] decision on 8 and 23 February 2011 to adopt new community care eligibility criteria are quashed.”
Lawyers from Irwin Mitchell acting for the two claimants,said the ruling sent “a very clear message” to all councils in England and Wales seeking to make similar cuts. Alex Rooke of Irwin Mitchell said “If a council seeks to make cuts to its budget for adult social care, it cannot do so by only meeting certain needs designed to keep someone safe, but neglecting their overall quality of life.”
The judge ruled that the council had failed to comply with its own internal guidance on its new policy for assessing eligibility for adult social care. A consultation document “provided insufficient information” to enable those consulted on the criteria changes “to give intelligent consideration and an intelligent response”, the judge said.
The council said it was facing a reduction of £21m in central government funding, representing a £33m budget gap taking into account inflation and increased need.
It added that 80% of those savings had to be made by the end of 2012-13. The savings anticipated through changes to the council’s community care eligibility criteria, plus charging, amounted to £2.5m.
In a joint statement, the council leader, David Pugh, and the cabinet member for adult social care, housing and community safety, Roger Mazillius, said: “We are naturally disappointed with this decision, having genuinely sought to undertake a thorough and proper process of consultation.
“The Isle of Wight council was required to make substantial budget savings within a short timeframe, while at the same time protecting those who were most vulnerable and in need of support. We also had to look to the future and position ourselves to face the demographic and financial challenges that the coming years will bring.
“We will now need to spend time reflecting on the implications for both service users and the wider council budget before deciding on our next course of action.
“We accept the judge’s decision that we did not provide sufficient information and that, in our attempts to explain what was a complex decision, we unintentionally breached some elements of the guidance.”
The statement said council staff would be making immediate contact with the 32 service users directly affected by the changes “to offer a reassessment of their needs”.
This is the second major case against cuts to care funding that Irwin Mitchell have won in the past few months, the first case being against Birmingham City Council.
To see this story in its original format go to the Guardian website with its related links on here – https://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/11/social-care-cuts-unlawful-court
Similiar cases, refer:
https://benefits.tcell.org.uk/forums/queen-application-elaine-mcdonald-and-royal-borough-kensington-and-chelsea
https://benefits.tcell.org.uk/forums/tribunal-decisions