Charging archive 2021-2022


Archive has 333 results

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 194)

    Statement Upheld Charging 15-Mar-2022

    Summary: The Council was at fault, because it did not offer the complainant’s mother an affordable care home placement, before asking her to pay a top-up towards her mother’s fees. This meant the top-up arrangement did not adhere with the statutory guidance. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice this caused, by reimbursing the complainant the money she should not have paid.

  • Birmingham City Council (21 014 629)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 14-Mar-2022

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a charge placed on his property by the Council. This is because the matter has been decided in court and is therefore outside our jurisdiction.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (21 000 143)

    Statement Upheld Charging 11-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X complained he was not told about the standard charge for care services at the extra care housing accommodation where he lives. The Council was at fault as it failed to explain the standard care charges associated with extra care housing when Mr X moved in. The Council has agreed to waive the charges and assist Mr X to move should he wish to do so. It has agreed to ensure prospective tenants are provided with information about the service charges associated with extra care housing.

  • London Borough of Bromley (21 006 747)

    Statement Upheld Charging 11-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council carried out a financial assessment for her mother, Mrs Y. There was fault with how the Council and its provider gave Mrs X appropriate information and advice about care charging and in how it treated Mrs Y as a temporary care home resident when she was not. The Council agreed to apologise to Mrs X for the avoidable frustration and uncertainty this caused her and pay a financial remedy. It also agreed to review its procedures.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (20 011 940)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 11-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to assess his friend’s contributions for residential care properly. He said Mr Y could not afford the payments. I have not found evidence of fault by the Council.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (21 001 888)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 10-Mar-2022

    Summary: Mr Y complained the Council overcharged him for care and failed to make him aware of the standard charge for care services when he moved into an extra care housing facility. The Council was not at fault. The records show the Council explained the charges associated with extra care housing, and has charged Mr Y for care based on his financial contribution.

  • Bupa Care Homes (BNH) Limited (21 014 482)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 10-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the care provider has failed to honour a binding agreement to apply a permanent 2% reduction to his mother’s care home fees. This is because there is no sign of fault by the care provider.

  • Birchlands (Haxby) Limited (20 014 293)

    Statement Upheld Charging 08-Mar-2022

    Summary: Ms B complained on behalf of her father about charging and the way the care provider treated funded nursing care payments. She considered the contract the family signed meant the payments should have been used to reduce the fee but instead they had been retained by the care provider. Mr X had, therefore, paid too much for his care. There was fault by the care provider which caused injustice to Mr X.

  • Richmond Care Villages Holdings Limited (21 006 718)

    Statement Upheld Charging 07-Mar-2022

    Summary: The care provider did not act in accordance with the admission agreement the late Ms X signed. Its explanation of its actions did not accord with the contract. The care provider will reimburse the FNC payments received.

  • West Sussex County Council (21 015 660)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 07-Mar-2022

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council charged the complainant for care while she was in hospital. This is because there is no evidence off fault.

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