Summary: We upheld Ms X’s complaint about Mr Y’s direct payments. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council handled her son, Mr Y’s, direct payment transition poorly. She said it delayed payments when it moved him to a managed account. She said she disagreed with the decision to move to a managed account and that the court appointed a health and welfare deputy. She said it caused her distress and financial difficulty. She wants the Council to be transparent and admit it handled the transition poorly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X complained the court appointed a health and welfare deputy to be the authorised person to manage Mr Y’s direct payments. We have no jurisdiction to investigate matters decided in court.
8. Ms X complained the Council handled Mr Y’s transition from another local authority poorly and delayed payments when moved to a managed account.
9. Ms X said the first payment was due in June 2026. Based on my enquiries there was a delay of five weeks.
10. In its complaint response the Council accepted it handled the transition poorly and apologised. Therefore, we found the Council at fault causing the complainant injustice.
11. The delay caused an injustice to Ms X and Mr Y due to avoidable distress and uncertainty.
12. We therefore asked the Council to consider remedying the injustice caused by making a symbolic payment of £200 to Mr Y.

Back to top

Agreed action

13. Within one month of this final decision, the Council agreed to:
• Make a symbolic payment of £200.
14. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above action.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We upheld Ms X’s complaint. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman