Norfolk County Council (19 016 171)

Statement Upheld Charging 10-Nov-2020

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council took three years to chase an outstanding balance owed for her mother’s care charges without any notice during this time that the balance was owed. Mrs X says that the estate was disbursed six months prior to the Council’s contact meaning that there is no money available for settlement of the balance. The Council was at fault for the delay in contacting Mrs X about the outstanding balance. I agreed with the Council’s offer to reduce the balance by £1,407.90.

London Borough of Tower Hamlets (19 008 533)

Statement Upheld Charging 10-Nov-2020

Summary: Ms X complains the Council did not explain her father’s care charges or take account of his mental impairment. This has led to a very large debt. The Ombudsman finds no fault causing injustice regarding the Council’s handling of the financial assessment and advice regarding Mr X’s contribution to care charges.

Birmingham City Council (19 017 698)

Statement Not upheld Charging 09-Nov-2020

Summary: Mrs X complains about the way the Council dealt with the charges for Mr X’s domiciliary care package resulting in her owing backdated fees causing distress. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters and has completed his investigation.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (19 017 860)

Statement Upheld Charging 05-Nov-2020

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to provide her with proper information about who was responsible for paying her mother, Mrs Y’s care home fees when she moved out of the Council’s area. Mrs X also complains the Council delayed carrying out an assessment of her mother’s social care needs. We found fault because the Council failed to provide this information. The Council also delayed carrying out an assessment on Mrs Y which would have revealed much sooner it considered the responsibility for funding Mrs Y was for another council. The Council has proposed a suitable remedy in this case and so we are completing our investigation.

Nottinghamshire County Council (20 004 943)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 03-Nov-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the care his late father, Mr C received or charging for the care. This is because Mr B’s complaint is late and there is no good reason for the Ombudsman to disapply the law to investigate it now.

Rachel Bridget Mohidin (19 015 559)

Statement Upheld Charging 03-Nov-2020

Summary: Mrs X complains about the actions of a care home. She says the care home did not consult with her before it gave notice on her mother’s placement and did not tell her it would charge the full care fees if possessions were left in her mother’s room. She also complains about charges made regarding some sundry items. The Ombudsman finds fault with the care home for not consulting with Mrs X, not providing information about its charges, and for not keeping accurate records. We have made recommendations.

Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (19 010 661)

Statement Not upheld Charging 03-Nov-2020

Summary: There is no fault in the Council’s decision on the care needs of Mrs B after discharge from hospital. The social worker considered the views of the medical staff and family before reaching a professional judgement on the care needed without fault. The family say the care home fees they paid for 5 months should be refunded as the home carers were not acceptable to them. But, the Council offered a discharge to assess bed which would have allowed further assessment of Mrs B.

Sunderland City Council (19 016 487)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 30-Oct-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a decision by the Council following it completing a financial assessment related to residential care costs. This is because he cannot make any determination of fault by the Council and he cannot question the merits of a decision in the absence of fault. The Council has admitted the assessment was delayed. The Ombudsman considers its offer of £500 is a satisfactory remedy in this respect and does not propose to take further action.

Knightingale Care Limited (19 008 764)

Statement Upheld Charging 29-Oct-2020

Summary: Mr B complains the Home did not reduce his mother’s care fees after she received Funded Nursing Care. He says when he first moved his mother into the Home, it indicated that it would work to get any benefits due to her that would reduce the costs. He says the Home continues to receive the Funded Nursing Care (“FNC”) while charging a higher fee. The Ombudsman finds fault in how the Home communicated the way it treats FNC and the impact on its fees.

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (19 015 484)

Statement Not upheld Charging 27-Oct-2020

Summary: Mrs X complains the Council did not provide her family with information that she would potentially have to pay for the full cost of her care fees. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council. This is because it did provide Mrs X’s family with information she would have to pay for the full cost of her care fees if her capital was over the limit of £23,250.