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:

  • Cumbria County Council (20 013 483)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 31-Aug-2021

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council reclaimed unspent direct payments it provided to her as her mother's carer. The Council was not at fault for reclaiming the unspent funds. It was at fault for not advising Ms X it intended to do this and for not giving her four weeks' notice in line with its terms and conditions. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Ms X to acknowledge the frustration caused. It has also agreed to take action to prevent a recurrence of the fault.

  • Isle of Wight Council (21 000 195)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 27-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's decision not to reimburse her deceased father's estate for the care she provided him between November 2019 and March 2020. We find the Council was at fault in how it considered whether Mr Y's direct payments could be used to pay for the care Mrs X provided. That has meant he paid for care he was entitled to receive financial support for. The Council has agreed to reimburse Mr Y's estate with the direct payments for the care Mrs X provided. It will also review its policy on direct payments.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 007 920)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 25-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the way the Council reassessed their adult son Mr S's care needs and about its failure to cover the cost of an increase in the care provider's hourly rate. The Council was at fault. It delayed reassessing Mr S and has not shown how the revised budget is sufficient to meet Mr S's needs. It has not backdated the direct payments sufficiently leaving Mr S in debt to the care provider. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr and Mrs X to acknowledge the frustration the faults caused them. It has agreed to pay the backdated amount owed to the care provider and to produce evidence to show how the budget is sufficient to meet Mr S's needs.

  • Herefordshire Council (20 011 186)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 23-Aug-2021

    Summary: There is evidence of fault in this complaint. The Council reduced Mr Y's direct payment because it wrongly believed direct payments cannot be spent on social/community activities, which in this case were identified as an eligible need.

  • Surrey County Council (20 011 374)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 03-Aug-2021

    Summary: There was fault by the Council as it did not act in line with the Ethical Framework for Adult Social Care during the first lockdown because it made no attempts to contact Mrs X and her family. The Council has agreed to make a retrospective direct payment and this remedies the injustice.

  • Essex County Council (20 012 711)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 28-Jul-2021

    Summary: There was fault by the Council. It failed to deal with Miss B's request to increase direct payments for her daughter's care for over two years, despite her repeated contact to resolve this. This caused Miss B prolonged and significant distress as she became more fearful that her daughter's care would be terminated. The Council should apologise to Miss B and her daughter, make a payment to her, and review how it can prevent the fault recurring.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (20 001 443)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 16-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y, that the Council stopped Mrs Y's direct payments too early. That resulted in Mrs Y receiving invoices from HMRC and PayPacket, the third-party company who processed the payments to her carer. The Ombudsman found fault causing injustice when the Council failed to maintain proper oversight of Mrs Y's direct payment.

  • Northamptonshire County Council (20 008 039)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 30-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mr D complained the Council failed to advise his parents until March 2019 that his father's transport funding had stopped in 2016 and they should not use his direct payments for this purpose or socialising. Mr D says his parents were faced with an unexpected bill and suffered unnecessary upset and distress which particularly affected his father's health. We have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action of an apology, removal of charges and a review of procedures is enough to provide a suitable remedy.

  • Northumberland County Council (20 000 293)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 17-Jun-2021

    Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council has dealt with Ms Y's direct payment account and its decision to decline arranging a further independent audit of her account. The Council is not at fault for declining to offer a further independent audit to Ms Y. The Council is at fault as its communication with Ms Y lacked clarity which caused upset to her. The Council has apologised to Ms X and Ms Y for the confusion and upset caused which is an appropriate remedy. I have therefore completed my investigation

  • Darlington Borough Council (20 004 697)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 07-May-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council's handling of her husband, Mr Y's direct payments between 2015 and 2018. This resulted in the Council issuing them an invoice for £6879 for unaccounted and unauthorised spending of the direct payments. The Council was at fault for failing to monitor, audit and provide support to Mrs X and Mr Y on their spending of the direct payments. It was also at fault for failing to keep adequate records. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X and Mr Y for the distress and uncertainty this caused and reduce the outstanding debt owed.