Brighton and Hove City Council has apologised for clawing back cash from the families of children with disabilities.
The apology came after the Local Democracy Reporting Service highlighted how “direct payments” had been taken from bank accounts with little or no notice.
Three mothers spoke out about the effect of the clawbacks as they struggled to find and pay for help and support for their children.
And the Labour MP for Hove, Peter Kyle, said that he would raise the matter with ministers in Parliament.
The outcry followed the clawing back of sums amounting to more than six weeks’ worth of payments for support such as respite care, personal assistants and after-school clubs.
Mothers said that they often had to save the payments to fund some of the things that many families take for granted.
To read what they had to say, click here.
The council said: “We would like to apologise for the concerns our approach to reclaiming surplus money held in the direct payments accounts has caused, particularly if this has led to any worries or concerns for any parents or carers, as this was not intended.
“We recognise that this has been a particularly difficult time for families which has been compounded in recent times by the pandemic.
“We would like to offer reassurance that we are committed to working with PaCC (the Parent Carers’ Council) which offers support to the families in Brighton and Hove who have children with disabilities.
“Therefore, we will be arranging to meet with PaCC in the coming week to address any concerns arising from our recent withdrawal of surplus funds from ‘direct payment’ accounts.
“We have no intention of leaving parents out of pocket for the services they commission.
“If they feel like they don’t have enough money in their accounts to pay for support and services, they can contact either their ‘pod’ manager or their social worker to look at ways of resolving their issues.
“Our intention was to warn people in advance of the withdrawals. It is very unfortunate that letters sent to families informing them of the planned withdrawal of surplus funding appear to have been delayed. We believe this must have been due to postal strikes.
“The six-week balance period referred to in the letter has been done here in previous years and is a policy used by lots of councils.
“It is to ensure that unnecessary surpluses do not build up in individual accounts.”
One more example of why B&HC should be in special measures or merged with another council which seems able to deliver (take your pick – but East or West Sussex are a start!)
If the concern was that an account had a large surplus then why not contact the account holder (using the people listed in the article) to ask why the surplus and their plans? This would have identified if any were “unnecessary” or whether they were saving for specific needs. Just taking the money before asking is wrong – compounded by writing a letter after taking the money anyway. And why use the post – surely email/text details would be held for all? Cheaper, more environmentally friendly and faster. It’s basic error after basic error
And what happens now – apologies and “learning” statements. Yet basic errors will happen again and again. We deserve better.