Premiere Care (Southern) Limited (19 004 281)

Statement Upheld Charging 31-Mar-2021

Summary: Ms X says Mrs Y’s care provider increased her weekly fee by £150 despite her care needs not changing. We have found evidence of fault in how the care provider raised Mrs Y’s care fees and have recommended a remedy for the injustice caused to her and any other affected residents. The care provider agreed to our recommendations.

London Borough of Hillingdon (20 002 979)

Statement Upheld Charging 31-Mar-2021

Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council handled Mrs Y’s care costs resulting in him receiving a larger than expected bill. We find the Council was at fault for not specifying how much Mrs X’s care charges would be. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and review its procedures to ensure it tells people the costs they must pay for care.

Staffordshire County Council (20 004 575)

Statement Upheld Charging 31-Mar-2021

Summary: Mr X, who complains on behalf of his wife, says the Council is at fault in how it assessed the contribution she needs to make towards her care costs. We have found evidence of fault and made recommendations to address this and the injustice caused. The Council agreed to our recommendations and so we ended our investigation of this complaint.

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (20 005 455)

Statement Not upheld Charging 30-Mar-2021

Summary: Mr X complains on behalf of Mrs T about the Council’s decision that she deprived herself of assets to avoid paying her care fees. Mr X says as a result, the Council has refused to fund Mrs T’s care fees which has caused Mrs T significant stress, uncertainty and financial loss. Mr X says the process has also affected his wellbeing. There was no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decisions.

London Borough of Haringey (20 007 540)

Statement Upheld Charging 25-Mar-2021

Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his late mother about the sort of room she was given in the care home where she lived and the way it assessed her financial contribution to the home’s charges. He considered the room was not suitable and that she had been overcharged. There was fault by the Council in its communication with Mr X for which it will apologise.

Trafford Council (20 005 846)

Statement Not upheld Charging 24-Mar-2021

Summary: The Council has said it will re-assess Mrs B’s finances and make a decision on her charges. Mrs B then has a fresh right of appeal/complaint if she does not agree with the outcome of that assessment. We have discontinued the complaint as we do not normally investigate complaints until the Council has had an opportunity to investigate the complaint and to respond to the complaint.

Leicester City Council (20 010 150)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 18-Mar-2021

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the initiation by the Council of safeguarding investigations in relation to the complainant’s care and financial management for his father. This is because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. We will not investigate a complaint on behalf of the complainant’s father as we do not consider the complainant to be a suitable representative.

Buckinghamshire Council (20 010 311)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 17-Mar-2021

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint that the Council‑commissioned care provider did not reduce her late mother Mrs X’s care fees once they started to receive NHS Funded Nursing Care payments. There is not enough evidence of fault by the care provider in the way it dealt with this matter to warrant our investigation.

Kent County Council (20 005 027)

Statement Not upheld Charging 16-Mar-2021

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to treat savings in his wife’s sole bank account as a joint asset when calculating her contribution towards the cost of her residential care. We find the Council was not at fault in treating the savings as belonging solely to Mrs X.

Lincolnshire County Council (20 004 464)

Statement Not upheld Charging 15-Mar-2021

Summary: There is no fault in the Council’s decision making during the financial assessment process. The Council has considered the law, guidance and reached a decision that deprivation of capital has occurred. The Council has reached a view on the amount of capital it will disregard without fault. New explanations of the gifting made at appeal had not been made to the Council before and it is at the Council’s discretion if it wants to consider a new assessment of this information.