Charging archive 2019-2020


Archive has 238 results

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (18 008 051)

    Statement Upheld Charging 20-Aug-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen find no fault in the way an NHS Trust and Council handled two discharges from hospital for a man who had undergone an operation. However, the Ombudsmen find the operation was delayed unnecessarily, but poor record keeping by the Trust means we cannot resolve why this happened. The Ombudsmen also find fault in the way the Council and NHS Trust handled the complaint. The Council and Trust have agreed to actions to address the injustice these failings caused.

  • North Yorkshire County Council (18 018 542)

    Statement Upheld Charging 16-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr N complained on behalf of his uncle, Mr X, that the Council provided Mr X with intermediate care and then wrongly charged him both for this and for later care. He also complained the Council failed to include him in assessments about Mr X’s care. There was fault in the way the Council carried out Mr X’s financial assessment. However, this did not cause him an injustice. The Council should reassess Mr X’s financial contribution for the period he was in a residential short stay.

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (19 004 138)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 16-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s refusal to repay the top-up fees he paid for his mother’s care home between 2006 and 2011. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the events complained about happened too long ago to be investigated now and so fall outside our jurisdiction.

  • Dorset County Council (18 014 574)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 15-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mrs H complains on behalf of her mother about the Council’s decision that she had deprived herself of capital, in order to reduce the amount she was charged for care. The Ombudsman’s view is the Council’s decision was a reasonable one for it to make, based on the evidence available. So it is not one the Ombudsman can criticise.

  • Thomas Henry Mallaband Limited (18 017 122)

    Statement Upheld Charging 14-Aug-2019

    Summary: The care provider should have applied for the Funding Nursing Care (FNC) award. It should have provided clearer information about the fees payable for Mrs X. It has apologised to Mr A for its shortcomings. It should review the way in which its information for prospective residents is worded to avoid more confusion and refund the amount of the FNC payments.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (18 014 304)

    Statement Upheld Charging 12-Aug-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s decision to place his late mother in residential care and to pursue the family for the cost of that care. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council in its decision or in charging the estate. The Council delayed in dealing with Mr B’s complaint and has offered a suitable remedy.

  • London Borough of Havering (19 000 204)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 12-Aug-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms A’s complaint about the amount the Council is charging her father, Mr B, for his care. This is because there is no evidence of fault warranting an Ombudsman investigation.

  • Premiere Care (Southern) Limited (19 004 863)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 09-Aug-2019

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the fees charged for late payment of care home fees. The Care Provider has agreed a reduction in the fees and so we are satisfied with its actions.

  • City of York Council (18 016 098)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 09-Aug-2019

    Summary: We do not uphold Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about their care charges.

  • East Riding of Yorkshire Council (17 019 371)

    Statement Upheld Charging 09-Aug-2019

    Summary: The Council has admitted delaying in sending an invoice, which is fault. But there is no evidence of an injustice as Mrs X was liable for care charges. The Trust acted with fault in not being able to show it had considered Mrs X for continued health care funding but there is no evidence of injustice as it is unlikely Mrs X was eligible for health funding. The Ombudsmen also found fault with the Council in not carrying out a joint complaint investigation with the CCG. However, there was no injustice to Mrs X and Mrs Y and our investigation picked up the Trust and CCG’s evidence. The Ombudsman have recommended service improvements to remedy the faults identified.

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