Last week I received a report I’ve been waiting for on an investigation by the local government ombudsman into a complaint against Bolton metropolitan borough council. It tells a disgraceful story.

It’s about what happened recently to a vulnerable young man, referred to as “Andrew Taylor” to protect his identity. Andrew has Fragile X syndrome, which involves autism, a learning disability and epilepsy. So he has very complex and particular needs and is entitled to continuing care and support from the council.

When he left his residential special school, the council ought by law to have assessed his needs carefully and offered him a suitable place to move to and services to support him living there as happily and independently as possible.

Instead, it failed to do so, suggesting only placements that seemed unsuitable to Andrew’s parents.

Frustrated by this failure, his parents found a specialist placement in the community, but the council refused to pay for it.

As a result of this uncertainty, Andrew soon became confused and unhappy, showing more and more challenging behaviour (as it’s rather euphemistically called), which is what happens when people with autism feel unsettled and threatened.

Within days of leaving school he was sectioned because of his behaviour and put in a locked adult psychiatric ward in a mental hospital, heavily sedated with a liquid cosh.

There he remained incarcerated and drugged for 18 miserable months, even though he should not have been there. He is not mentally ill and with proper support could have been living calmly and happily. The unit had no facilities for managing patients with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour.

The ombudsman upheld Andrew’s family’s complaint, finding Bolton council responsible for “maladministration causing injustice”. That is a rather cool way of describing many months of bitter anguish.

“It is disturbing to think,” wrote the ombudsman, “that . . . all that stood between Mr Taylor and a severely limited future in a secure facility distant from his home was his strong and determined family and one council officer with enough courage, imagination and willingness to listen to his family.” Disturbing indeed.

Although it was indeed Andrew’s devoted family who constantly stood up for his needs and rights, they were at almost every turn ignored or sidelined by the very people who have a statutory duty to support him and to take his family’s views into account.

When the family’s protests at Andrew’s treatment became tiresome, it was even contemplated cutting them out of the loop altogether. At one case conference, officials discussed the possibility of asking the court to displace “Mrs Jefferson” (Andrew’s mother) and put him under a guardianship order. This wasn’t pursued, but it’s chilling to think it was even raised.

It is chilling to think it needed such courage for one excellent officer to stand up to her colleagues. It is also chilling to think how much confidence, drive, time and money it takes for a family to make a complaint or legal challenge. Few families could do it.