Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council’s hourly direct payments rate is insufficient to purchase care and support from his chosen care provider. An investigation is unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complain on behalf of his mother, Mrs Y, that the Council’s hourly direct payments rate is insufficient to purchase care and support from his chosen care provider.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered comments and information form Mr X and the Council. Mr X had an opportunity to comment on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs Y receives direct payments from the Council to arrange her care and support. She has used the same care provider for several years.
5. In June 2019 the Council increased is hourly rate for direct payments by 2% and backdated it to April 2019. This increased the hourly rate for direct payments to £14.87.
6. The Council notified service users of the increased rate and explained that if they wished to continue with their existing private arrangements, they would be responsible for the difference between the Council’s hourly rate and the rate charged by their care provider. It said that service users could also transfer their care to a council managed service instead if they chose.
7. Mrs Y opted to remain with her care provider who had increased their prices by 3% to £15.31 per hour.
8. Mr X asked the Council to increase its direct payments rate to cover the full cost of his mother’s care and support. The Council refused because Mrs Y had chosen to remain with a more expensive care provider whose fees were above the Council’s rate. It explained that it is possible to arrange appropriate support at its rate.
9. Mr X says the Council is discriminating against people who don’t use the Council’s preferred care providers and believes the Council is restricting freedom of choice within the care market.
10. Under the Care Act 2014 direct payments should be enough to enable the recipient to arrange care and support at a standard the Council considers is reasonable to meet the person’s needs. The Council has provided evidence to show there are six care providers in the area whose hourly rates fall within the amount set by the Council.
11. In these circumstances, an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to find fault in the Council’s decision not to increase its direct payments rate. The Council has no control over the care provider’s decision to increase its hourly rate and is not under a duty to cover the full cost of Mrs Y’s care when she has opted to remain with a more expensive provider.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because an investigation is unlikely to find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman