Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s funding decisions for her son Mr X’s care provision and Disability-Related Expenses (DREs). There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making processes to warrant us investigating and we cannot achieve the outcomes she seeks.

The complaint

1. Mr X is disabled, has severe learning disabilities and is pre-diabetic. Mrs X is Mr X’s mother and manages his finances. Mrs X complains the Council:
1. has not disregarded from the assessment the use of his money on home improvements to the property where he lives;
2. has refused to fund as Disability-Related Expenses (DREs) horse riding, and a towbar allowing Mr X’s tandem bicycle to be moved by trailer so he can use it in safer areas;
3. has failed to take account the additional costs for Mr X’s healthy diet when determining his DREs;
4. is requiring Mr X to contribute too much to his care provision.
2. Mrs X wants the Council to:
• disregard from his assessment all the costs of the home improvements;
• review the decision for Mr X to pay £30 a week towards his care package;
• take account of Mr X’s ongoing diet costs and all the activities she considers essential to his health and wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. 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; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. We are not an appeal body. We can only criticise a council decision where there is evidence of fault in the decision-making process and but for that fault a different decision would have been made. So we consider the process they have followed to make their decision. We cannot replace a decision with our own or someone else’s opinion if the decision was reached after following proper process.
7. In relation to the home adaptations made for Mr X to Mrs X’s property, the Council noted that Mrs X’s previous property had been accessible for him. Then Mr X moved to a supported living placement away from the family home. He lived at the placement four days per week and with Mrs X for the remaining three days. During that time, Mrs X moved to her current property which did not have the same accessibility for Mr X. Mr X’s placement broke down and he moved back in with the family at the new property full-time. Mrs X used Mr X’s funds to alter the property to accommodate Mr X and his personal assistant and ease access.
8. The Council considered Mrs X’s request to have this expenditure on her property disregarded in Mr X’s financial assessment. Officers noted that even while at the supported living placement, Mr X was at the family home three days per week, so would need it to be as accessible as the previous family home had been. Officers considered the works Mrs X had done were not essential ones for Mr X’s and his assistants’ use of or access to the property. The Council determined in these circumstances the alterations would need to be funded by Mrs X and any other owner of the property.
9. In response to Mrs X’s appeal against the Council’s decisions on Mr X’s DREs, officers considered her comments and evidence. They noted Mr X’s need to avoid unhealthy foods but decided this was a need for a well-balanced and healthy diet, not a need specifically relating to his disability. The Council considered whether the towbar cost, to pull Mr X’s tandem on a trailer, should be part of the DREs. The Council noted it funds five activities for Mr X per week, which it considers meets his assessed need for activities. Officers also considered Mr X could use the tandem without having to first transport it by car. They recognised horse riding was a preferred activity for Mr X but determined any further exercise could be met through different lower cost activities. Councils are not required to treat as DREs all preferred types of expenses. If someone has an assessed exercise or activity need, councils may meet that need by offering a different activity, not the preferred one.
10. The Council determined the level of care contribution required from Mr X. We understand Mrs X considers Mr X should be able to retain more of his benefits to spend. But officers applied relevant policies to reach their decision.
11. The Council gathered and considered the appropriate information and applied the relevant policy when reaching deciding not to disregard the house alteration expenditure from Mr X’s assessment, and when making its DRE decisions. There is not enough evidence of fault in any of the Council’s decision-making processes here to warrant us investigating. We recognise Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decisions. But it is not fault for a council to properly make decisions with which someone disagrees.
12. The complaint outcomes Mrs X seeks are for the Council to review and change the decisions it has made on Mr X’s financial assessment, DREs and care contributions. The Council has not made the decisions Mrs X wants but has already considered these matters. We cannot order a council to or change a decision it has already properly made. That we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks is a further reason why we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making processes to warrant us investigating; and
• we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman