Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Direct payments


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Lincolnshire County Council (21 007 887)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 11-Apr-2022

    Summary: Mr B complains about the Council's decision not to allow him to use direct payments to employ his mother, who he lives with, as his personal assistant. We found fault as the Council has not properly considered whether there might be exceptional circumstances. The Council has agreed to re-consider Mr B's request and review its procedures.

  • Bristol City Council (21 004 220)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 04-Apr-2022

    Summary: We found fault with the Council for the way it communicated with B about his personal contribution debt. There was also some fault with the way the Council communicated with B during its complaint process. This caused B distress. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice it caused B.

  • Leeds City Council (21 015 710)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 29-Mar-2022

    Summary: The investigation into this complaint is discontinued. The Council acknowledged it failed to review Mr Y's care needs and failed to inform him his direct payments had ceased. It remedied this situation before the complaint came to this office. There is no fault by the Council in its refusal to reinstate direct payments for services not in place or backdate payments for services not received.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (20 013 481)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 10-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs C complained about the way in which the Council supported her mother. We found fault with the way an assessment was carried out, which however did not result in an injustice to Mrs C or her mother.

  • Suffolk County Council (21 003 447)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 08-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of Mr Y about the Council's changes to his direct payment and support plan when it removed mileage costs and acupuncture. He said this caused Mr Y much stress and it created a shortfall in his account. We find the Council was not at fault in deciding not to fund these, but it did not make this clear to Mr Y in the case of the mileage costs for years. The Council has agreed to apologise and backdate the allowance to 30 September 2020 (the point where it has clear evidence Mr Y was told it would no longer be allowed).

  • Hampshire County Council (21 003 302)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 04-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr R, representing his daughter, Ms G, said the Council was at fault for delays in providing suitable care for Ms G, and for being unhelpful and obstructive in the way it monitored spending of direct payments made to fund that care. He also said it was responsible for unnecessary delays in finding care and communicated poorly with the family. The Council was at fault for poor communication. This fault caused Ms G injustice because the family felt the Council was accusing them of dishonesty. The Council should apologise. I have not found the Council at fault in other regards.

  • Suffolk County Council (21 002 940)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 17-Feb-2022

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council changed and suspended his son, Mr Y's, direct payments during 2020 without adequate communication or explanation. The Council was at fault for failing to pay Mr Y's respite payment since 2020 despite it being an assessed care and support need. The Council agreed to apologise and pay Mr X a total of £500 to recognise the frustration, uncertainty, time and trouble and loss of opportunity that caused. It agreed to reinstate the respite payment. An administrative error also meant Mr Y did not receive his direct payment during October 2020. The Council has already apologised to Mr X and paid the missing amount which is a suitable remedy.

  • Shropshire Council (21 009 053)

    Statement Not upheld Direct payments 14-Feb-2022

    Summary: We did not uphold Ms X's complaint about reclaiming an unspent direct payment because the Council acted in line with Care and Support Statutory Guidance and its direct payment policy and explained how it had calculated the payment that Mr Y needed to make.

  • North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 180)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 14-Feb-2022

    Summary: There was fault by the Council in failing to audit Ms Y's direct payment or carry out yearly financial assessments. This caused Ms Y and her family avoidable confusion. The Council will apologise, write off an overspend, reclaim an overpayment, reduce the outstanding client contribution and take action to improve services described in this statement.

  • East Sussex County Council (21 006 916)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 04-Jan-2022

    Summary: The investigation into the way the Council dealt with Mrs Y's direct payments will be discontinued. The Council has proposed a fair remedy and we would not be able to add anything to the outcome.