Home > About Us > News Updates > News Details

Cost-cutting Council chiefs face legal challenge from families with disabled children

Proposals to cut children's services are argued to be unlawful

Two Lancashire families with severely disabled children have launched a legal challenge against their local County Council’s controversial proposals to make multi-million pound cuts to its social care budget.

Launched by the parents of Boy A and Boy D who together rely on the Council’s funding to pay for up to 150 days of respite care and short breaks, the judicial review application claims that Lancashire County Council’s proposals to reduce spending on ‘children and young people’ services by £11.8m are unlawful.

National law firm Irwin Mitchell has been appointed to represent the families and if it is successful, the local authority could be forced to look again at how it plans to reduce its social care bill.

Boy A is 10 years old with complex needs resulting from autism and cerebral palsy. He requires one-to-one care at all times which is provided by various family members including his father, mother, older sister and grandmother. He receives respite care of up to 96 nights per year.

Eleven year old boy D is autistic with global developmental delay and limited communication abilities. He has no sense of danger and consequently requires constant adult attention. The Council have in the past provided on average one night of respite care each week.

Mathieu Culverhouse, Solicitor at Irwin Mitchell acts for the families and argues that the Council’s decision making process at the start of the year represents a breach of both the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Children Act 2004 as it failed to take into account what the full impact of the changes on the children will be.

Mathieu Culverhouse said: “These two families, along with hundreds of others across the region, rely heavily on this respite care. Although it is accepted that Councils are required to make significant cost savings, they should not be doing it in a way which ignores the legal rights of some of society’s most vulnerable individuals.

“Ordinarily, Councils and other public bodies ensure they have complied with the Disability Discrimination Act by carrying out an Equality Impact Needs Assessment (EINA). There was no EINA in this case – in fact, no discernable evidence that the council were aware of their duties under the Act.”

Documents submitted to the court also highlight how the Council made decisions based on an inaccurate understanding of the law.

Mat explained: “The Council claimed at the beginning of the year that its proposals were necessary because from April 2011, new laws state that families can only claim up to 75 nights of respite care each year. This simply is not true and shows quite clearly that the Council is basing its decisions on irrelevant considerations. 

He added: “In this judicial review our vulnerable clients seek a declaration that the Council’s decision making process in this area was unlawful. Although it will remain under pressure to cut costs, we want to force it back to the drawing board and ensure it looks at alternatives which do not impact so heavily on vulnerable groups.”

Commenting on the case, Melanie Close, Chief Executive of the Disability Equality (NW) Ltd. added:

“We understand the Council need to save money but these are worrying times for disabled people, parents and carers. Decisions that affect people's quality of life cannot and should not be taken lightly - that's why we have legislation to protect disabled children and adults. We hope the Council will look again at the decisions made and how they made them.”

Lancashire County Council’s decision to reduce the amount of money it provides for Children and Young People services by £11.8m were made in light of the Central Government’s Spending Review last year which required a £179.2m saving over three years including a £71.6m saving during the 2011/12 financial year. Following the Council’s cabinet meetings in January 2011, it decided to consult on reducing the budget for children and young people by £11.8m.

Tags: lcc, cuts, care, judicial-review