Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council imposing a limit on disability related expenses in her financial assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council imposing a limit on disability related expenses in her financial assessment. She says the Council has inappropriately imposed a £40 limit.

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))

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.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council has a policy where any claims for disability related expenditure (DRE) of above £40 per week will need to be supported by evidence, such as the provision of receipts for the expense incurred. The Council is allowed to set its own policy.
6. The Council said that it had considered Miss X’s evidence and agreed her specific needs created an exceptional level of expenditure for cleaning products and wipes. The Council agreed to DRE for a total of just under £50 a week. Therefore, the evidence does not support Miss X’s view that the Council has set a limit of £40 per week for her DRE.
7. Miss X appears to be unhappy that the Council completed two financial assessments which determined different contribution amounts. One assessment (Assessment 1) detailed Miss X’s assessed contribution was just under £7.50 a week, the other (Assessment 2) £26.50 a week. Miss X is unhappy about this increase.
8. On reviewing the two financial assessments, I can see Assessment 1 allowed for more DRE than Assessment 2. However, an investigation is not justified as the Council explained the amount that was allowed is the amounted supported by receipts. I can also see Miss X’s income had increased and this likely also contributed to the increase in contributions.
9. Therefore, an investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault as the Council completed the financial assessment appropriately. The Council is also allowed to complete reassessments and so we are not likely to find fault with the Council for completing another financial assessment despite already having done one.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman