Direct payments


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Lambeth (18 002 708)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 05-Jul-2019

    Summary: We uphold Ms A's complaint about a council stopping her direct payment because there was a failure to consider whether she could continue to manage with additional support. There was also fault in the failure to address a long-term under spend, a failure to give clear directions about how Ms A could spend a surplus of her direct payment and a failure to tell the payroll company the agreed funding. This caused Ms A avoidable distress. To remedy the injustice, the Council will apologise, pay Ms A £250 and pay her carers' invoiced wages for December 2017 plus redundancy payments. We do not uphold complaints about funding in 2016, about inadequate agency care or about complaint handling.

  • Leeds City Council (18 014 760)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 21-Jun-2019

    Summary: Ms B says the Council failed to give information about a financial client contribution for adult social care; she didn't pay and there is an outstanding debt. I find the debt is rightly due. There was a delay in the Council auditing Ms B's social care account. The Council wrongly sent an invoice to her father and disclosed her personal data to him. There have been many errors in communication. This has caused shock, frustration, stress and time trying to sort matters. The Council has taken some steps to remedy matters, it has now agreed to also deduct £250 from the outstanding invoice.

  • West Sussex County Council (18 012 549)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 10-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mrs D complains the Council should not recover direct payments which she says she used to pay for her mother's care. The Ombudsman's decision is that there is evidence of fault by the Council because it failed to clearly explain the reasons for the outstanding debt. The Council has agreed a suitable remedy.

  • Birmingham City Council (18 013 998)

    Statement Not upheld Direct payments 21-May-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to take account of his brother's exceptional circumstances in deciding that direct payments cannot be used to employ family members to provide his care. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered Mr X's request for direct payments to allow family members to care for Mr Y.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (18 011 052)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 20-May-2019

    Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to assess her needs properly in March 2018, resulting in a significant cut in her personal budget. When the Council identified changes in her circumstances it should have done a needs assessment. The failure to do so means it is unclear whether it is providing enough help to meet her eligible care needs. The Council should do a needs assessment and take action to make sure it does them when necessary in future.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (18 012 814)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 08-May-2019

    Summary: Mrs X complained fault by the Council led to her mother overpaying for home care. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault for not providing enough information when Mrs X's mother moved from funding her care privately to getting direct payments from the Council. The Council has agreed to give Mrs X further written explanations and, if her mother paid the care agency more than she should have done, refund the difference. It will also amend staff guidance to prevent the fault recurring.

  • Norfolk County Council (17 003 431)

    Statement Not upheld Direct payments 08-May-2019

    Summary: There was no significant fault by the Council. The direct payments it paid to Ms B covered the cost of the support her live-in carers provided when a suitable respite placement could not be found.

  • London Borough of Lewisham (18 009 712)

    Statement Not upheld Direct payments 08-May-2019

    Summary: It was not fault on the part of the Council to expect Mr X to use its pre-paid card to access his Direct Payments in the absence of evidence the system would not work for him.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (18 009 040)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 30-Apr-2019

    Summary: Miss X says the Council is at fault because it has not allowed her to modify her personal budget so that she can employ a personal assistant. The Ombudsman recommended the Council review its decision. It has done so and agreed to provide Miss X with a budget that will allow her to employ a suitable personal assistant. For this reason, the Ombudsman has ended his investigation of this complaint.

  • Surrey County Council (18 011 536)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 29-Apr-2019

    Summary: Ms X and Ms Y complained the Council reduced their mother's direct payments but her care needs had not changed. The Council calculated their mother's personal budget based on its assessments of her needs. It has explained how the budget is sufficient to meet those needs, based on its experience of costs within the local care provider market. The Council took too long to respond to Ms X and Ms Y's complaint. It has apologised which is appropriate to remedy the injustice.