Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council requiring her daughter Miss Y to repay Direct Payments money spent on a stairlift. The Council has agreed not to pursue the monies, that the use of the funds was acceptable, and to apologise to Miss X. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has agreed to take and it is unlikely an investigation would achieve a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss X is Miss Y’s mother. Miss Y has learning and physical disabilities. Miss Y lives with Miss X. In 2023, the Council assessed Miss Y as needing a stairlift but could not supply one for several months. Miss Y had an operation in 2024 and during her recovery her mobility was further affected. Miss X used Miss Y’s Direct Payment money to buy a stairlift to help with providing care for her at home.
2. Miss X complains the Council unfairly required her to repay the Direct Payment money spent on the stairlift.
3. Miss X says she was upset and shocked at the Council’s position. She wants the Council to agree the stairlift was essential equipment for Miss Y, that it was acceptable to use her Direct Payments money to buy it, and decide she does not have to reimburse them for it.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information from Miss X and the Council and considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. We made the Council aware of Miss X’s complaint to us. The Council decided to start a review of the matter by senior management.
8. If we had investigated the complaint, it is likely we would have found the Council at fault. The Council has accepted in its review that while its Direct Payments policy expects families to seek approval before making certain purchases, officers also have discretion. The review recognises Council recovery of Direct Payment funds is intended to be used where they are not spent to meet an assessed care need or involve some other misuse. The Council now considers its recovery of the funds was not appropriate because Miss X’s purchase of the stairlift met Miss Y’s assessed needs so was not a misuse of the Direct Payments. An investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome here.

Back to top

Agreed action

9. To its credit the Council agreed to resolve the complaint by:
1. formally withdrawing the request for repayment by Miss X of the Direct Payment monies;
2. sending a written apology to Miss X for the distress and unclear guidance on Direct Payments spending;
3. sending written confirmation to Miss X that the stairlift purchase is accepted as an appropriate use of Direct Payments.
10. The Council’s proposed actions provide the outcomes Miss X was seeking through her complaint and we are satisfied with those actions.
11. The Council will take all the above actions within one month of this decision.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not further investigate Miss X’s complaint because:
• an investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome; and
• we are satisfied with the Council’s proposed actions to resolve the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman