Four councils have launched a legal challenge against the government on the grounds it has failed to provide sufficient funding for the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
Nottinghamshire, Richmond, Shropshire and Liverpool councils have lodged a judicial review against health secretary Jeremy Hunt, arguing he has created “an unacceptable risk of illegality” by leaving councils without adequate funds to meet their statutory duties to vulnerable service users.
The councils also claim Hunt has breached the government’s “new burdens” doctrine by failing to increase the funding provided for DoLS despite the Supreme Court’s landmark ‘Cheshire West’ ruling in March 2014 triggering a tenfold rise in cases.
The local authorities say government funding for DoLS has been maintained at around £34m a year. The Local Government Association has argued at least an additional £172m a year is needed to meet the costs of the Cheshire West judgment in relation to DoLS.
The Law Commission has estimated between £405m and £651m is needed annually to fully comply with the ruling. This estimate includes both DoLS cases and the applications to the Court of Protection required to authorise deprivation of liberty in community settings, such as supported living.
The new burdens doctrine requires government to match new local government responsibilities with adequate funding or an equivalent reduction in burdens elsewhere.
The government has previously argued the increase in DoLS demand “does not count” as a new burden because it arose from a Supreme Court judgment, not a government decision. The councils claim in order to implement government policy lawfully, they must follow the Supreme Court judgment, therefore it is a new burden.
The judicial review application claims Hunt’s failure to act on the Cheshire West ruling has left councils with a “massive funding deficit” in delivering the DoLS protections. As a result councils are racking up growing backlogs of DoLS referrals and have arrived at a “reluctant acceptance” that they must follow Department of Health guidance to ‘prioritise’ which people should receive the safeguards.
The councils argue this guidance is “astonishing” and “unlawful” as it risks individuals not receiving safeguards they are entitled to.
The councils also argue there is insufficient funding to handle deprivation of liberty cases in the community. As a result hundreds of people are also deprived of their liberty in the community without any protection from the Mental Capacity Act due to the pressure on the system, they claim.
The councils submit that their experiences are “broadly representative of a national crisis” caused by Hunt’s “unlawful” failure to meet his duties.
The Department of Health said it would not comment on ongoing legal proceedings.
‘We cannot keep placing social workers under this pressure’
The councils’ judicial review application includes concerns over the pressure being placed on social workers, and particularly Best Interests Assessors.
In a statement, a witness from Liverpool council said: “We cannot keep placing our BIAs and social workers under this level of pressure. I am deeply concerned about the impact upon the BIAs and the DoLS team in an environment that I can see is only getting more and more difficult as we strive to ensure Article 5 rights are enforced.
“We have to look at the risks of social workers burning out as they undertake more and more of this work outside of usual working hours. They must be able to feel that they can do the job properly and protect people’s rights.”
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Lincolnshire County Council 
Norfolk County Council 
Northamptonshire Children’s Trust 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wiltshire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Children and young people with SEND are ‘valued and prioritised’ in Wiltshire, find inspectors 
How specialist refugee teams benefit young people and social workers 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
Podcast: would you work for an inadequate-rated service? 
Family help: one local authority’s experience of the model 
‘We are all one big family’: how one council has built a culture of support 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
Pity no one is shouting so loud over the pressure that children’s social worker have been under for years! welcome to our world!
I do agree with the challenge but the issues are in all areas of social work…
I’m sorry but I find your comment disrespectful to those of us that work within the BIA role. I have worked in most areas of social work including children’s services and I can honestly say that I haven’t come across this in other areas on this scale!!.
The recent case law ruling has intensified the number of DoLS referrals and with the lack of government funding and BIAs this job is endless and impossible.
I completely agree that supported housing is no place to dump vulnerable people. It’s doing them a disservice. I surely hope that councils and housing associations learn from this. Stop making profits off the backs of mentally ill people. They disgust me, these housing charities, who pretend to have ill patients interests at heart. They really don’t care about who they’re meant to be looking after. More fool the CMHT teams for letting it happen. A shoe box isn’t a home. Putting a damn end to Supported-living is needed. It isn’t even a question. It needs to be stopped once and for all. All you housing associations need to put your housing stock back on council waiting lists. Please stop helping supported housing charities from financially abusing their tenants.