Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about managing direct payments to meet adult social care needs. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs E wants Mr X to continue managing direct payments for her son, Mr F. Mrs E is very worried and feels the Council is not listening to their choices.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. I considered the Care Act 2014 and associated statutory guidance.

Back to top

My assessment

6. When you are assessed as needing adult social care support, you can ask the council for direct payments so you can arrange your own care support.
7. Mr F does not have the mental capacity to arrange his own care support; for many years Mr X has been the authorised person to do this for him.
8. Recently the Council decided Mr X is no longer suitable to act as Mr F’s authorised person. Mrs E is upset as she wants Mr X to continue, and neither she nor her husband can manage the role.
9. The Care Act guidance states a council must discontinue direct payments if it is no longer satisfied the authorised person is acting in the best interest of the beneficiary, or if the authorised person is not meeting the imposed conditions. The council must then consider if someone else can act as the authorised person, or if it must arrange services in place of the direct payments.
10. The Council has explained why it does not consider Mr X a suitable person. Although Mrs E disagrees, that is not evidence of fault. The Council has met the requirements of offering someone else to act as an authorised person or directly arranging services to continue to meet Mr F’s eligible social care needs.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs E’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating. It is unlikely an investigation would add to the Council’s responses or achieve anything further. We cannot achieve the outcome of Mr X remaining as the authorised person where the Council has decided he is not suitable.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman