Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal of his claim for additional heating and electricity costs to be included as disability related expenditure in his son’s financial assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal of his claim for additional heating and electricity costs to be included as disability related expenditure in his son’s financial assessment. Mr X says the national average figures the Council used to calculate the additional costs is at odds with OFGEM’s figure.

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 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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s son has eligible care and support needs. To assess how much his son needs to contribute towards his care and support costs, the Council completed a financial assessment.
7. Mr X asked the Council to consider the additional gas and electric his son uses to meet his need as disability related expenditure (DRE).
8. In the financial assessment, the Council agreed to allow a weekly amount of £0.86 as DRE in relation to gas and electric. The Council worked this out by deducting the estimated cost provided by Mr X with the national average of a single person in a detached property.
9. Mr X complains about the figure used by the Council as the national average. The figure used by the Council amounts to just over £2744 per year. Mr X says that OFGEM’s figure is just over £1800 per year. Mr X feels the figure the Council has used is too high.
10. The Council provided a copy of its charging policy which details that when calculating DRE, it uses figures calculated annually by the National Association of Financial Assessment Officers (NAFAO).
11. The care and support guidance does not require the Council to use certain figures as the national average. This means councils have discretion to decide what figures they use in their assessments.
12. In this case, the Council has set out in its policy what figures it will use, and it is allowed to make this policy decision. Therefore, while I acknowledge Mr X feels the figure the Council has used is too high, we could not find the Council at fault for this.
13. Therefore, an investigation is not proportionate as we are not likely to find fault as the Council has applied its policy appropriately before deciding how much DRE to allow. As the Council reached its decision properly, it is allowed to make it.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman