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.

The complaint

1. Ms X, a solicitor, is complaining on behalf of Ms B. Ms X complains that the direct payments the Council paid Ms B for the year 2014-15 did not cover the cost of her care. Ms X says that Ms B’s personal budget was based on 50 weeks of live-in care and two weeks of respite care but that she had to pay her live-in carers to provide an extra two weeks of care because a suitable respite placement could not be found. Ms X complains that the Council has since taken the amount it had allocated for respite care from Ms B’s direct payments account because she did not go in to respite care, without providing any funding to cover the additional two weeks of live-in care she had to pay for.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Ms X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council has provided; and
• given the Council and Ms X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Everyone whose needs are met by the council must receive a personal budget as part of the care and support plan. The personal budget gives the person clear information about the money allocated to meet the needs identified in the assessment and recorded in the plan. The council should share an indicative amount with the person, and anybody else involved, at the start of care and support planning, with the final amount of the personal budget confirmed through this process. The detail of how the person will use their personal budget will be in the care and support plan. The personal budget must always be an amount enough to meet the person’s care and support needs.

Year commencing October 2014

6. The Council provides Ms B with a personal budget. It includes an amount to pay Ms B’s live-in carers, Mr C and Mr D, to provide her with care and support.
7. Ms B’s support plan for 2014-15 shows that the personal budget was based on Mr C and Mr D providing Ms B with 52 weeks of support. It did not include any additional payments for respite.
8. I am satisfied that the amount the Council paid into Ms B’s direct payment account covered the cost of Mr C and Mr D providing 52 weeks of live-in support. I have found no evidence of fault here.

Year commencing October 2015

9. Ms B’s support plan for 2015-16 shows that the personal budget was based on Mr C and Mr D providing Ms B with 50 weeks of support. It also included a payment of £1173 to fund two weeks of respite.
10. The Council paid the respite payment into Ms B’s direct payment account in October 2015 but then reclaimed it in February 2016. It said that it had done so because the money had been withdrawn from Ms B’s account but she had not taken any respite. The Council said that the payment was to fund two weeks of respite to be taken between 19 October 2015 and 18 October 2016 and that once arrangements were made for Ms B to take the respite, it would pay £1173 back into her direct payment account.
11. In April 2016, the Council told Ms X that if Ms B did not take any respite before the end of October 2016, the Council would pay Mr B and Mr C for providing an extra two weeks of support.
12. Ms B did not take any respite. I am satisfied from the information I have seen that the amount the Council paid into Ms B’s direct payment account covered the cost of 52 weeks of live-in support. I have found no evidence of fault here.

Year commencing October 2016

13. Ms B’s October 2016 review shows that the personal budget was based on the cost of 52 weeks of live-in care. It said that if Ms B took any respite care, it was to be paid out of the amount it had allocated for 52 weeks of live-in care. This was to ensure there was no confusion in future.
14. The Council then paid a respite payment of £1173 into Ms B’s direct payment account on 26 October 2016.
15. On 19 October 2017, the Council wrote to Mr C to say that as Ms B had not taken any respite since it made the respite payment in October 2016, her next payment would be reduced by £1173. Correspondence from the Council and Ms X suggests that the Council reclaimed the payment in late October/early November 2017.
16. The Council accepts that it should not have paid the respite payment to Ms B in October 2016. I am satisfied that the Council was entitled to reclaim it.

Final decision

17. I have completed my investigation and do not uphold Ms X’s complaint. There was no significant fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman