Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to suspend direct payments to a payroll company for his care service. This is because, although the Council was at fault by making payments into the wrong account during 2018, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s subsequent action.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complained about the Council’s decision to suspend direct payments to a payroll company for his care service. Mr B told us he is not receiving the care he needs.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the information Mr B provided and the Council’s response to his complaint. I have given Mr B an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B told us he wants the Council to re-start making direct payments to the payroll company and for his carer to be paid.
5. In 2018 the Council agreed to make direct payments to meet the cost of the care Mr B needed. In its response to Mr B’s complaint the Council said Mr B had signed a direct payment agreement. This agreement set out the records Mr B needed to keep and send in and said that the direct payments could only be spent on meeting the needs in his care and support plan.
6. In error, for most of 2018, the Council paid direct payments into Mr B’s personal bank account rather than to the payroll company. From 2019 the Council started paying the payroll company.
7. The Council says the payroll company made three payments to Mr B’s personal assistant in 2018. The payroll company has informed the Council there were six months in 2018 when it did not receive the personal assistant’s time sheet.
8. When the Council found out about its error and the non-payment by Mr B of his contribution to his care costs, the Council asked him for some information. The Council says the information it asked Mr B to provide included evidence of payments to his personal assistant. The Council asked Mr B to return unspent money.
9. The Council says Mr B reported there was no direct payment money left in his personal account and failed to provide monitoring information or evidence of payments to his personal assistant. In its response to Mr B’s complaint it says it was keen to resolve the difficulties and offered meetings with his social worker or with its support service. The Council told Mr B it had suspended direct payments and offered council-managed services because Mr B had not agreed to work to resolve the issues. The Council said it was open to further discussion with Mr B once he had received some advice and provided further information.
10. The Council was originally at fault in this case because it made the direct payments into the wrong account. But, after that, there is no evidence of further fault by the Council. It was entitled to ask Mr B for monitoring information and evidence of payment to his personal assistant. It is not fault for the Council to ask Mr B to show how he used the direct payments he received to meet his care needs. So there is not enough justification for us to call on the Council to provide the remedy Mr B wants. In the circumstances of this case, it is unlikely we would find the Council at fault for suspending the direct payments. The Council has offered Mr B a managed service so he can receive the care he needs.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because, although the Council was at fault by making payments into the wrong account during 2018, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s subsequent action.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman