Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about disability related expenditure. We are unlikely to find fault with how the Council came do its decision, and it has not yet caused a significant injustice we could investigate anyway.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complains on behalf of Mr X. Mr X complains the Council refuses to recognise fuel spent to practice his faith as a disability-related expense (DRE). Mr X says the Council’s decision means he would not be able to afford the current care support he receives. He wants the Council to consider the fuel a DRE.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs Y and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. A council has a duty to arrange care and support for those with eligible needs, and a power to meet both eligible and non-eligible needs in places other than care homes. A council can choose to charge for non-residential care following a person’s needs assessment.
7. Councils can take disability-related benefit into account when calculating how much someone should pay towards the cost of their care. When doing so, a council should make an assessment to allow the person to keep enough benefit to pay for necessary disability-related expenditure to meet any needs it is not meeting.
8. The Council has considered Mr X’s request that faith related fuel costs be considered DRE. The Council refused the request, and subsequent review. The Council explained the reason for its decision.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a person disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
10. In this case, I am satisfied the Council has considered the relevant law, guidance and policy when completing Mr X’s financial assessment for contribution toward his adult social care costs.
11. By law people may complain to the Ombudsman if they have already suffered injustice from a council’s actions. The Council has assessed Mr X should make no contribution to the cost of his care now. Neither we nor the Council can anticipate what may happen in future. If circumstances change and Mr X or Mrs Y consider the Council’s position creates injustice later because it begins to charge him a contribution to his care costs, they may complain again, first to the Council and then to us.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault with the Council’s decision-making, and it has not yet caused injustice to Mr X in a way which we could investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman