Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Bristol City Council (18 013 368)

    Statement Upheld Charging 11-Jul-2019

    Summary: There was fault by the Council. There was delay in allocating a social worker when a hospital discharged an elderly lady into temporary residential care. The Council has apologised for the delay and agreed to continue to charge the resident as a short stay resident.

  • Norfolk County Council (18 014 879)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 08-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains that the Council charged him for time in respite accommodation when he was told he would not be charged. He says this caused him anxiety and affected his health. The Council has offered to waive the outstanding charge so we have stopped our investigation.

  • Warrington Council (18 003 639)

    Statement Upheld Charging 03-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mrs B complained the Council failed to review her mother's care needs which meant it did not consider a referral for continuing healthcare, failed to follow procedures when setting up a deferred payment arrangement and unreasonably pursued the family for care fees when a continuing healthcare assessment is outstanding. The Council was at fault for not carrying out annual reviews but not for the way it set up the deferred payment arrangement or for seeking repayment of care fees from the family. An apology is satisfactory remedy for the injustice caused.

  • Surrey County Council (18 006 759)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 02-Jul-2019

    Summary: Miss B complains that, when assessing her mother's contribution to her residential care home fees, there was fault in the way the Council decided not to exercise discretion to disregard the value of her mother's share in the family home. The Ombudsman has found no substantive fault in the way the Council has considered the matter, and so cannot question the merits of the Council's decision.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (18 017 386)

    Statement Upheld Charging 01-Jul-2019

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to tell the family the outcome of a financial reassessment of their mother's contribution towards her home care and delayed sending amended invoices for the contributions. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for being unclear about the result of the reassessment, delay in invoicing, failure to explain the late invoice and failure to put the complaint through its complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to apologise and to write off the debt caused by late, backdated adjustments. This is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused by the Council's faults.

  • Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (18 015 876)

    Statement Upheld Charging 26-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to take responsibility for his mother's (Mrs Y's) care and support needs. He also complains he was given poor legal advice. He says this has led to financial difficulties, uncertainty and distress. The Council is at fault. The Council is currently responsible for Mrs Y's care and support. It has agreed to write to all those involved to clarify its position, apologise to Mr X and pay him £500 to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused. It has also agreed to work with Mr X to agree the support required to meet Mrs Y's needs and provide agreed support in line with the law and its policies. It will also provide guidance for staff. There is no evidence of fault in the legal advice it provided Mr X.

  • North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (18 013 427)

    Statement Upheld Charging 26-Jun-2019

    Summary: There was fault by the Council as it delayed carrying out a financial and care assessment for one and a half years. Mr B, an adult with considerable care needs, remained in his placement and so there was no direct injustice to him. The Council has offered to waive the return of an overpayment, reduce the financial contribution and fund the cost of day care until the date of the financial assessment. The Council has also offered to recalculate the date Mr B became eligible for help with care costs as new accounts have been supplied.

  • Cornwall Council (18 007 799)

    Statement Upheld Charging 25-Jun-2019

    Summary: There was fault in the way the Council assessed Ms B's needs for care and support and in the way it decided that it did not have to provide her with support. The Council has agreed to apologise to the family, carry out a financial assessment of Ms B and, depending on the outcome of the assessment, repay Ms B's estate any money it owes.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (18 012 402)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 25-Jun-2019

    Summary: There is no evidence that shows Council told Mr X that Mrs Y would receive a period of free reablement care. Mrs Y was not a suitable candidate for such care and Mr X was informed Mrs Y would have a financial assessment and depending on the outcome, would have to contribute towards her care.

  • Poole Borough Council (18 015 283)

    Statement Upheld Charging 24-Jun-2019

    Summary: There was fault in the way the Council assessed Mr B's finances when he went into a care home. The Ombudsman has recommended the Council apologises and re-assesses Mr B's finances from May 2017.