Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to consider his request for his child’s direct payments to be used to fund his child’s trips to another city. This is because an investigation would not lead to any different findings or outcomes.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his child’s direct payments. He says the Council refused to consider his request for his child’s direct payments to be used to fund his child’s trips to another city.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained the Council refused to consider his request to allow his child’s direct payments to be used to fund his trips to another city. His child received direct payments to fund Yoga, Swimming, and Enabling services.
6. However, Mr X’s child could not engage with the swimming or enabling services, which led to a surplus of funds in the direct payment account. Mr X wanted to use this surplus to pay for his child’s trips to another city.
7. The Children Act 1989 sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. We call this the “children’s statutory complaints procedure”. The Ombudsman would normally expect a council and complainant to follow the full complaints procedure.
8. Mr X has had his complaints considered under the children’s statutory complaints procedure. The stage two independent investigation did not uphold any of Mr X’s complaints. The investigator’s main findings were:
• The Council could not consider changing the use of the child’s direct payments to new activities without a new assessment of need being completed.
• The absence of a new assessment of the child’s needs prevented the Council’s formal consideration of changing the use of direct payments.
9. Mr X’s complaint was then considered at stage three, which was a review panel. The review panel did not uphold any of Mr X’s complaints. Their main findings were:
• The process of reassessment was required for the direct payments provided to be reconsidered for differing needs.
• Noted that Mr X said he had not blocked the proposal for a further assessment but also considered the investigator’s report that Mr X had refused to engage in the process.
10. I accept Mr X does not agree with the stage two investigator and stage three review panel findings. I acknowledge it is Mr X’s view that he should have been allowed to use the direct payment to fund his child’s trips to another city, which he considers to be essential.
11. However, if a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider the investigation was flawed.
12. I have reviewed both the stage two investigation report and am I satisfied there is no evidence the investigation was flawed. I also note Mr X does refer to some procedural flaws with the stage three meeting, but I do not consider these would have affected the outcome of the stage three panel findings. Therefore, an investigation is not proportionate as it would not lead to any different outcomes or findings.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation would not lead to any different findings or outcomes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman