Charging archive 2021-2022


Archive has 333 results

  • London Borough of Lambeth (21 014 043)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 27-Jan-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this late complaint about charges for Mr X’s mother’s care. There is no good reason Mr X did not bring his complaint to us sooner.

  • Herefordshire Council (21 013 974)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 27-Jan-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council pursuing Mrs C’s estate for payment it says she owed. This is because further investigation by the Ombudsman could not add to the Council’s responses or make a different finding.

  • Kent County Council (21 005 950)

    Statement Upheld Charging 27-Jan-2022

    Summary: Ms C complains the Council failed to calculate charges properly and inappropriately pursued for arrears. As well as making some procedural changes the Council has agreed to apologise to Ms C and pay her £250 for how it dealt with backdating charges. The Council is also at fault for failing to properly consider payments made by Ms C towards housing and council tax in financial assessments for care at home. It has agreed to reconsider Ms D’s current financial assessment and review procedures.

  • West Sussex County Council (21 012 773)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 26-Jan-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council managed care home fees for the complainants’ mother. This is because the events happened too long ago and I see no reason to exercise discretion and investigate the matter now.

  • London Borough of Haringey (21 006 438)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 24-Jan-2022

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint which alleged it unfairly raised the contribution the complainant’s uncle makes towards the cost of his care.

  • Essex County Council (21 007 259)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 24-Jan-2022

    Summary: Mr X says the Council charged his late father for palliative care even though he was told the Council would not charge for the care. Mr X also says his father was charged for periods when he returned home from hospital and should have received charge free care under the reablement programme. No further action is needed as the issue is not one the Ombudsman can deal with.

  • London Borough of Hounslow (21 003 942)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 21-Jan-2022

    Summary: The complainant complained the Council failed to include in her late mother’s financial assessment the valuation it had placed on her home resulting in her being liable for the full costs of her residential care. The complainant says the Council failed to seek an independent valuation as provided for under the Care Act 2014. The Council said it followed the correct procedure, considered the likely value of the property on the open market and this was not challenged for several years. We found the Council acted without fault.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (21 005 507)

    Statement Upheld Charging 20-Jan-2022

    Summary: Mr C complained on behalf of his son, D. Mr C complained about the way the Council carried out its financial assessment and decreased D’s allowances. We found fault with the Council. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to D.

  • Dorset Council (20 013 611)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 19-Jan-2022

    Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council was being unreasonable in asking her to pay back over £6000 arrears of charges for her daughter’s respite care. She did not realise she had to inform the Council of a change in her daughter’s income because the household income remained at the same level. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council.

  • Coate Water Care Company (Church View Nursing Home) Limited (20 010 381)

    Statement Upheld Charging 18-Jan-2022

    Summary: The complainant, whom I shall call Ms C, complained on behalf of her (late) father, whom I shall call Mr F. Ms C complained about the way her father was charged for his residential care between 11 December 2019 and 31 January 2020. We found fault with the way the Council dealt with Mr F’s financial assessment and the way the care provider dealt with the signing of the contract. Both parties have agreed to apologise for this. Furthermore, the Council will provide a refund of some of the care home fees Mr F had to pay between 11 December 2019 and 31 January 2020.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings