Southwark Council apologises after vulnerable resident's phone cut off for three months

Southwark Council has apologised to a vulnerable resident after its failure to pay her telephone bill led to her landline being disconnected for three months. The Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman found the council at fault for the delay, which has since been rectified. The council has also amended its procedures to prevent similar issues from recurring.

The resident, identified as Ms Y in an Ombudsman report, has a mental health condition and is considered at risk of exploitation. She lives alone and receives support from a relative, Ms X, and a council care plan. Since 2019, Southwark Council has acted as Ms Y's corporate appointee, with its Clients Affairs Team responsible for managing her finances, including paying bills and providing funds for personal expenses.

Complaint over financial management

Ms X contacted the Ombudsman in September 2025, complaining that the council had not adequately managed Ms Y's finances while acting as her appointee. Ms X stated that the council's delays in communication had caused disappointment and frustration for both herself and Ms Y, and that her views and needs as next of kin had not been properly considered.

In November 2024, Ms X alerted the council that Ms Y's telephone bill remained unpaid and her landline was not functioning. Further contact was made by Ms X in December 2024 and January 2025 regarding the unpaid bill and the disconnected line. The council did not settle the telephone bill until February 2025, following Ms X's repeated complaints, at which point Ms Y's landline was reinstated.

Further concerns raised

In March 2025, Ms X escalated her complaint, expressing concern that the council had not addressed the delay in paying the telephone bill and questioning its preparedness for future emergencies. She also raised issues regarding the council's handling of a request for funds for birthday celebrations and shopping arrangements for Ms Y.

The council's response in April 2025 included an apology for the late payment of the telephone bill, though it maintained that other communications had been handled promptly. The council stated it would review how to make funds more accessible for shopping and acknowledged its failure to ensure Ms Y's attendance at a March 2025 meeting with Ms X.

A safeguarding concern regarding aspects of Ms Y's support was raised in May 2025, leading to a safeguarding enquiry. During social worker visits in June 2025, Ms Y indicated a preference for modest spending, setting a £50 limit for gifts and personal expenses. Later that month, Ms X requested an escalation of her complaint, citing ongoing delays in payments and decision-making.

Ombudsman's findings

The Ombudsman determined the council was at fault for not arranging Ms Y's presence at the March 2025 meeting and apologised for the resulting injustice. It was also noted that the council had not conducted a formal mental capacity assessment or held 'best interest' meetings regarding Ms Y's appointeeship for over two years. The Ombudsman suggested a new assessment of Ms Y's mental capacity.

Aside from the late payment of the telephone bill, the Ombudsman found no fault in the council's overall management of Ms Y's finances. The council's safeguarding enquiry in 2025 had identified Ms Y as being at risk of financial abuse, with existing safeguards deemed appropriate to remain in place.

In its conclusions, the Ombudsman stated that the council had included Ms X in best interest decisions and the safeguarding enquiry, and had properly considered her views. The Ombudsman also advised that if Ms X believes the council is not acting in Ms Y’s best interests, she could apply to the Court of Protection to become a court-appointed deputy.