The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to suspend her direct payment. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council stopped her direct payment, without warning, in June this year whilst it was auditing it. This has left Mrs X without funds to pay for her care. Mrs X says she has had to rely on family and friends for money and is now in debt. It has caused her a lot of distress.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended) We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X complained to the Council after it stopped her direct payment whilst it was auditing it. Mrs X said the Council stopped the payment without warning and did not explain why it was stopped. Mrs X is left without funds for her care services as a result.
In response to Mrs X’s complaint, the Council said it suspended Mrs X’s direct payment because she had not provided the evidence it requested to show how she was using her direct payment to meet her needs. It informed Mrs X what information she needed to provide prior to the deadline and it explained that if the information was not provided then her direct payment may be suspended.
The Council continued to correspond with Mrs X after the direct payment was suspended but Mrs X did not provide the evidence required to show she was using her direct payment to meet her needs in line with what was set out in her support plan. As a result, the Council said the direct payment agreement had been breached and the payment remains suspended. The Council offered to meet Mrs X’s care needs via a Council commissioned care package, or via a referral to other services, but Mrs X declined this option.
I can see no sign of fault by the Council here. It did not stop the direct payment without warning. It told Mrs X what evidence she needed to provide to show how her direct payment was being spent and it explained the possible outcome if she failed to provide this evidence. It has taken suitable steps to ensure Mrs X could continue to receive care services via other means, although this has been declined by Mrs X.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman