Summary: Ms X complained about how the Council took over management of her relative, Mr W’s finances. The Council was at fault for delay in chasing up the Department for Work and Pensions’ response to its application to become Mr W's financial appointee. It was also at fault for failing to act when it became aware there were issues with the application and for poor communication with Mr W’s mother, Mrs Y. This caused Mrs Y significant uncertainty and upset but did not cause Mr W an injustice. To remedy Mrs Y’s injustice, the Council will apologise and pay her £350. The Council will also identify what steps it will take to prevent similar fault in future.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about how the Council took over management of her relative, Mr W’s, finances and that it communicated with Mr W’s mother and previous financial representative, Mrs Y, poorly.
2. Ms X said this caused Mrs Y avoidable frustration and meant Mrs Y had to continue taking spending money to Mr W unnecessarily. Ms X also said the Council’s delay meant Mr W lost his Motability car, which has made getting out in the community more difficult for him.

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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)
6. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended). Ms X’s complaint covers the period between April 2022 and November 2023.
7. We received the complaint about Mr W in July 2024. Therefore, the period between April 2022 and July 2023 is late. I have decided to investigate the entire period; April 2022 to November 2023 because Mrs Y struggled to manage and understand how to administer his benefits, which meant she would have found it difficult to complain sooner. She also spends long periods abroad, when she is difficult to contact.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I have considered:
• all the information Ms X provided and discussed the complaint with her;
• the Council’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided; and
• the relevant law and guidance and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
9. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant background

10. When a person loses or does not have the ability or capacity to manage their benefits payments, a person or organisation can apply to the Department for Work and Pensions to become that person’s benefits ‘appointee’. If approved, the appointee receives the person’s benefits on their behalf.
11. Motability cars are available to people who receive the mobility elements of disability benefits. The cars are leased to the individual and the organisation ‘Motability’ takes the monthly fee direct from the benefits provider.

What happened

12. Mr W has complex needs which mean he cannot make financial decisions for himself. He lives in a supported living placement where he has daily help from care workers. Mr W had a Motability car which he used to access the community, with the support of care workers.
13. Mrs Y managed Mr W’s finances on his behalf and held the lease for his Motability car. However, Mrs Y struggled to manage because of personal reasons. The Council agreed to be Mr W’s benefits appointee and in early April 2022, it applied to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
14. In late September 2022, the DWP paid Mr W a £150 cost of living payment to the Council.
15. In October 2022, the Council told Mrs Y it had been appointed as Mr W’s benefits appointee in late September but had only received the one payment from the DWP. Mrs Y continued to receive Mr W’s benefits in the meantime and would leave money for him to spend on a daily basis.
16. In December 2022, the Council received Mr W’s £10 disability benefit Christmas bonus payment from the DWP.
17. In January 2023, Mrs Y told Motability the Council was Mr W’s benefits appointee. Motability contacted the Council repeatedly about the need for it to complete paperwork to take over Mr W’s lease, but did not receive a response.
18. The Council says it attended a meeting with Mrs Y and Mr W’s care provider in April 2023, where it realised it was not Mr W’s appointee. This was contrary to what it had told Mrs Y in October 2022. It chased the DWP at the end of the month.
19. In early July 2023, Mrs Y told the Council she had heard from Motability that it would reclaim Mr W’s car soon because the Council had not returned the paperwork taking over the lease from her. She said this was very upsetting to hear.
20. The Council told Mrs Y and Motability that it was not Mr W’s appointee in mid-July.
21. In late August, Motability told the Council it had spoken to the DWP who said the Council was Mr W’s appointee. The Council responded to say it had checked the situation and was satisfied it was not Mr W’s appointee. Motability disputed that; it said DWP had confirmed that day that the Council was Mr W’s benefits appointee.
22. At the end of August, the final deadline Motability had set for the Council to return the completed paperwork passed. Mr W’s car was taken away.
23. In mid-October 2023, the Council chased the DWP again.
24. The Council chased DWP for a response to its application in mid-November. It said it had recently received a B57 form which formally confirmed it was Mr W’s appointee, but it was not receiving Mr W’s full benefits.
25. The following day, the DWP began sending the Council Mr W’s benefits.
26. Mr W is still without a Motability car after his previous one was reclaimed. He is reliant on using the bus to get into the community, which Ms X says his care workers dislike.

Findings

Benefits application

27. It is evident the DWP took some time considering the Council’s application to become Mr W’s benefits appointee and that an issue occurred meaning it sent some of Mr W’s payments to the Council in late 2022 while continuing to send Mrs Y his monthly disability benefits. The Council only became Mr W’s appointee in November 2023.
28. The Council was not responsible for any delays or errors made by the DWP. However, the Council should have regularly contacted the DWP to chase up the response to its application and acted without delay when it received information which indicated there was an issue with its application. The Council did not do this, which was fault, as set out below.
29. The Council made the application to DWP in April 2022 but did not chase up a response to its application until April 2023. This was a significant delay.
30. The delay occurred despite the fact the Council received Mr W’s cost of living payment in September 2022 and his Christmas bonus payment in December 2022, but did not receive his monthly benefits payments. It was also despite the fact the Council received the payments without having a B57 form. These all indicated issues in the DWP’s consideration of the Council’s application, which it should have raised with DWP.
31. In addition, once the Council chased DWP in April 2023, it did not contact DWP again until October 2023; a further six months later. This was despite the fact Motability told it in August 2023 that it had spoken to DWP that day, which had confirmed the Council was Mr W’s benefits appointee. Again, this indicated an issue with the Council’s application, which it should have raised with the DWP.

Communication with Mrs Y and Motability

32. The Council’s communication with Mrs Y was poor. It wrongly told Mrs Y that it was Mr W’s benefits appointee in October 2022 and did not tell her that information was incorrect until April 2023. This was fault. The delay in the Council correcting its information occurred because of its failure to chase up Mr W’s case with DWP and clarify whether or not it was Mr W’s benefits appointee.
33. After Mrs Y told Motability the Council had said it was Mr W’s benefits appointee, Motability contacted the Council about Mr W’s lease paperwork in January 2023. The Council did not respond. This was further fault and meant the Council missed another opportunity identify it was not Mr W’s appointee and that there was an issue with its application.

Injustice

34. The faults caused Mrs Y significant uncertainty and upset. However, the faults did not cause Mr W a significant personal injustice. This is because Mrs Y continued to receive his benefits in the meantime and was able to give the money to him. In addition, I cannot say, even on balance, that but for the fault, the Council would have been approved as Mr W’s benefits appointee in time for it to take over the lease on Mr W’s Motability car, preventing it from being removed.
35. If Mrs Y feels Mr W wants or would benefit from a Motability car still, she can speak to the Council about making a new application for one.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will:
1. Apologise to Mrs Y for the uncertainty and upset she experienced due to its fault. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
2. Pay Mrs Y £350 in recognition of her injustice.
3. Explore why such significant periods of time elapsed before it chased the DWP and why it failed to identify and act on the issues with its application to DWP. The Council will identify what steps it needs to take to prevent similar fault in future and send us an action plan setting out what those steps are and when it will complete them by.
37. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

38. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice and prevent reoccurrence of this fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman