Essex County Council (18 014 284)

Statement Upheld Charging 26-Jun-2020

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s assessment of her relative, Ms Y’s, financial contribution to her care costs. She also said the Council had sent Ms Y a bill for historic care costs which it had previously withdrawn, and about poor complaint handling. There was no fault in how the Council calculated Ms Y’s assessed contribution. There was fault in its invoicing and communication, which caused
Ms Y uncertainty for 12 months about what she had to pay. The backdated invoice sent after the Council identified the fault has caused Ms Y financial hardship and distress. There was also fault in its complaint handling. The Council should write off the historic debt between April 2017 and March 2018 and review its complaint and invoicing procedures.

London Borough of Havering (19 015 623)

Statement Not upheld Charging 25-Jun-2020

Summary: Ms X complains the Council delayed in seeking payment of her son’s care contributions, causing financial difficulty and distress. The Ombudsman finds no fault by the Council.

North Yorkshire County Council (19 007 273)

Statement Upheld Charging 23-Jun-2020

Summary: Ms Y and Mr Z complained the Council failed to explain the charges due for their late mother’s home care and delayed sending her invoices. The Council was at fault. It delayed sending invoices and was not clear about when she had to start paying for care. It has agreed to waive 50% of the charges and to review its procedures to ensure service users sign and are sent copies of their needs’ assessments and support plans.

London Borough of Ealing (19 008 994)

Statement Upheld Charging 18-Jun-2020

Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not explain there would be a charge for his care package after the initial six weeks. Therefore, he was not able to make an informed choice about whether to continue receiving the care. The Council was at fault for not explaining about the charges when it arranged the care and for the delay in starting the financial assessment. It has apologised and has not charged Mr X for the period before it told him there would be a charge. No further recommendations are needed.

Durham County Council (19 012 614)

Statement Upheld Charging 18-Jun-2020

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s advice about costs and decisions it made when his mother moved into a care home. The Council was at fault for not providing Mr X with suitable advice. This caused Mr X avoidable uncertainty. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and review its procedure for providing advice about costs for residential care.

Surrey County Council (19 010 339)

Statement Upheld Charging 18-Jun-2020

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to complete a financial assessment for his mother, Mrs Y, or tell them about care costs before it arranged her package of care. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault for not confirming Mrs Y’s personal budget. That meant Mrs Y did not know the potential weekly cost of her care. The Council has offered to waive three weeks of care fees which remedies the injustice caused. It will also remind staff to share personal budgets when they have completed a person’s assessment.

Leeds City Council (19 011 445)

Statement Upheld Charging 18-Jun-2020

Summary: Mrs R complained about the Council’s decision that her father intentionally deprived himself of capital to avoid paying care fees. The Council was at fault for a delay in completing the financial assessment. It was not at fault in the way it reached the decision there was a deliberate deprivation of assets. However, it did fail to properly explain its reasons to Mrs R. It should apologise to Mrs R for the uncertainty caused by these faults.

Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (19 010 841)

Statement Upheld Charging 17-Jun-2020

Summary: Miss B complains on behalf of her father Mr C about the Council’s decision that a relative deprived herself of capital, in order to reduce the amount she would pay towards her care. The Ombudsman finds the Council’s decision was a reasonable one for it to make based on the evidence it had available, and so it is not one the Ombudsman can criticise. Leaving aside the substantive issue, there was some fault in the Council’s calculations and in its complaint response but the Council apologised and no further remedy is necessary.

Hampshire County Council (19 012 592)

Statement Not upheld Charging 16-Jun-2020

Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council made the decision that Mrs C’s mother was ineligible for a deferred payment arrangement.

Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (19 005 861)

Statement Upheld Charging 27-May-2020

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council had decided to move her mother, Mrs M, to another care home, which was not in Mrs M’s best interests. The Council was at fault for not properly assessing Mrs M’s needs when it became clear the family could not maintain the top-ups needed for her to remain in the current care home. It should now carry out a full assessment to inform decisions about Mrs M’s future care and apologise to Mrs X for the uncertainty caused as a result of its delay in doing this.