Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to suspend direct payments. That is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss B, has complained on behalf of Mr A, about the Council’s decision to suspend direct payments to him for his social care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant, Mr A’s complaint to the council and the Council’s responses to him.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In its response to Mr A’s complaint the Council said he had signed a direct payment agreement in 2019. The agreement stated Mr A could not use the direct payment to pay for services from a spouse, partner or close relative living in the same household as him. Mr A explained Miss B is not his spouse, partner or close relative. But the agreement also stated he could not use the direct payment to pay for services provided by someone living in the same household, except where the relationship was that of a live-in personal assistant and was based on a formal contractual relationship. In exceptional circumstances the Council can decide such an arrangement is the only satisfactory way to meet the person’s needs. But it has to agree to this in writing.
7. Mr A moved into Miss B’s household during the Covid 19 lockdown. He did not have the Council’s written agreement beforehand to direct payments continuing in these circumstances. The Council has told Mr A it was not aware of the change until September 2021. In January 2022 the Council suspended his direct payments in January 2022 because he was in breach of the direct payment agreement.
8. Mr A wants Miss B to carry on providing care for him. But we are not an appeal body with powers to substitute our decision for that of the Council. In this case the Council had the power to impose conditions in the direct payment agreement and to suspend direct payments if there is breach of the agreement without its prior written agreement. There is no obligation on the Council to agree to what Mr A wants. For these reasons, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman