Summary: Mr X complains the Council removed his access to a direct payment account and wrongly invoiced him for contributions and did not apologise. Mr X says this caused him avoidable and unnecessary distress. We find the Council at fault which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his family member’s direct payments account which he is responsible for. Specifically, he complains the Council:
1. removed his access to the account without explanation and did not apologise;
2. wrongly sent him an invoice for money he did not owe and did not apologise;
3. paid his family member’s carer late and did not apologise; and
4. delayed repaying him the payment he made to HMRC on its behalf and did not apologise.
2. Mr X says the Council’s actions has caused considerable unnecessary and avoidable distress and uncertainty to him and his family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have not investigated part c of Mr X’s complaint. This is because the Council’s delay paying the carer of Mr X’s family member has not caused direct injustice to Mr X. The Ombudsman does not investigate where any fault has not caused injustice to the person who has complained.
6. For this reason, I have only investigated parts a, b and d of the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered the information and documents provided by Mr X and the Council. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I have considered all comments received before making this final decision.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies and the Ombudsman’s guidance ‘Principles of Good Administrative Practice’. I also considered the relevant statutory guidance, as set out below.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

9. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for them to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They enable people to arrange their own care and support to meet those needs. The council must ensure people have relevant and timely information about direct payments so they can decide whether to request them. If they do so, the council should support them to use and manage the payment properly.
10. The Council’s website says if it has failed to provide its agreed standards or quality of service, it will acknowledge and apologise for this. It says it will then set out actions it will take to put things right and improve its services. 

What happened

11. Mr X managed his family member’s direct payments account.
12. In December 2023, the Council and Mr X agreed to close the direct payments account. Mr X tried to access the account several days before the agreed closing date and found he did not have access.
13. There were outstanding payments still to be made from the account. This included a payment to HMRC.
14. Mr X contacted the Council and requested access to the account. The Council did not give Mr X access to the account. He made the outstanding payment to HMRC using his own funds.
15. In early January 2024, Mr X made a formal complaint.
16. In late January, the Council responded to his complaint. It told Mr X it had requested the information about any outstanding payments from the social worker before closing the account. It explained the direct payment account had been moved to deposit only mode. It said this was standard practice for all accounts every month before the date it makes payments. It told Mr X this date was earlier in December due to the number of bank holidays. It told Mr X it would contact him again once it had calculated the final amount of money in the account.
17. In February, the Council sent Mr X an invoice for the outstanding amount it said he owed the Council. It amounted to over £3000. Mr X contacted the Council several times and did not receive a response.
18. In March, he made a second formal complaint.
19. In late March, the Council responded to his second complaint. It told Mr X it had cancelled the invoice because he had paid it previously. It told him the Council owed him a sum of £249.00 as he had overpaid.
20. In May, the Council made the £249.00 payment.
21. In October, the Council paid Mr X the amount he had paid HMRC.

Analysis

Closure of the account (part a of the complaint)

22. The Ombudsman’s guidance ‘Principles of Good Administrative Practice’ states that a council should inform service users what they can expect and what the organisation expects from them. It did not properly explain to Mr X what he should expect when closing the direct payment account. This led to Mr X making a payment out of his own funds which should have been paid by the Council. This is fault and caused avoidable and unnecessary financial strain.
23. Mr X says he did not receive the Council’s stage one response. Although this unfortunate, I find on the balance of probabilities, it is likely the Council did send him a copy. Furthermore, Mr X had access to most of the information detailed in its response from his other correspondence with the direct payments team. Therefore, I do not consider this is to be significant enough to make an additional finding of fault.

Incorrect invoice (part b of the complaint)

24. The Ombudsman’s guidance ‘Principles of Good Administrative Practice’ also states a council should acknowledge mistakes and apologise where appropriate. The Council’s website also reflects this. The Council has not acknowledged any mistakes or apologised to Mr X in his first or second complaint. It was reasonable for the Council to apologise to Mr X for the inconvenience caused to him by not properly explaining the process of closing the direct payment account. It was also reasonable for the Council to acknowledge its mistake in its final audit, and apologise to Mr X for significant anxiety caused to him by sending the incorrect invoice. I consider the lack of apologies to be fault, which caused further injustice.

Repayment delay (part d of the complaint)

25. The Council repaid Mr X the amount it owed for his payment to HMRC. Mr X made the payment to HMRC in December 2023 and received the repayment in October 2024. It took the Council 11 months to reimburse Mr X. It also appears it made this payment once it had contact from the Ombudsman. It is likely Mr X questioned whether he would receive the repayment. I consider this delay is fault which caused Mr X unavoidable and unnecessary distress and uncertainty.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide a written apology to Mr X for unnecessary and avoidable distress caused by not properly informing him of the process for closing the direct payment account, sending him an incorrect invoice and taking 11 months to repay the money owed to him.
2. Make a payment of £250 to Mr X to remedy the injustice caused by not properly informing him of the process for closing the direct payment account, sending him an incorrect invoice and taking 11 months to repay the money owed to him. In arriving at this figure, I considered our published guidance on remedies. I consider this amount is proportionate and appropriate to the level of injustice caused.
27. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have completed my investigation. I find the Council at fault and this caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman