Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Disability Related Expenditure. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about the way the Council asked for information about her Disability Related Expenditure (DRE).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and information about the DRE the Council has awarded. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. DRE can reduce the amount a person has to contribute to the cost of their care. Ms X gets DRE of £212 a week. Ms X does not have to pay anything towards her care costs.
5. Ms X complained to the Council that she had received a letter asking for evidence about her DRE. She said she had never been given any information about DRE. Ms X also complained the Council had repeatedly failed to send information in an accessible format, as she had requested.
6. The Council explained it was reviewing DRE awards. It had sent a letter in March 2021 asking for evidence of her DRE expenditure and it sent a chaser in December. It said both letters gave information about DRE and explained it needed proof of the expenditure being claimed. The Council apologised for not always sending information in an accessible format.
7. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council awarded DRE to Ms X and is entitled to ask for evidence that she still has the expenditure that attracts that award. It is unfortunate Ms X did not get the first letter but there is nothing to suggest it is due to fault by the Council. Ms X received the reminder and the Council has provided further explanations about why the information is needed. Ms X says she is still unsure what she needs to send but this is something she can pursue with the Council – it does not need an investigation.
8. Ms X says the Council treats her badly because she has made complaints. She says the problems regarding the DRE are an example of this. However, as I have not identified fault regarding the DRE, apart from the problems with the adjustments, then I cannot agree with Ms X’s interpretation of events. There is nothing to suggest the request for DRE evidence is connected to Ms X’s complaints.
9. There is the issue of whether the Council is complying with Ms X’s need for reasonable adjustments. We will be investigating another complaint from Ms X which includes that complaint so it is not necessary to investigate that issue again as part of this complaint. Ms X says the emphasis is slightly different but she can explain all the problems she has regarding adjustments as part of the other complaint investigation.
10. I also will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. Ms X has continued to receive DRE and the Council has explained why it asked her to provide evidence. Ms X says that as she did not know she would need to provide evidence she may not have kept all the invoices. This, however, is something she can explain to the Council and it is not known if any lack of proof will cause any problems.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman