Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about the way the Council has dealt with the charges for his father’s care. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr C, complained about the way the Council has dealt with the charges for his father’s care. Mr C says this has caused stress, anxiety and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the information Mr C and the Council have provided. I have given Mr C an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr C told us the Council reviewed his father’s care and began to charge him a contribution to the cost. The Council wrote to Mr C’s father, Mr D, care of Mr C, at Mr C’s address. But Mr C told us his property was empty from May to December 2018 while building work took place. When Mr C contacted the Council to ask for a breakdown of how it calculated the charge, he found out the charge started in June 2018. The Council says, as at the end of July 2019 the arrears outstanding are over £1,000.
5. Mr C complained to the Council. He argues the charges are not fair as he and his father did not have an opportunity to query the calculations. Mr C says the care Mr D received was inadequate but Mr D continued with the arrangement on the assumption he was not making a contribution to the cost. Mr C told us his father decided to arrange his own care but the Council has refused to cancel the outstanding charges. Mr C says the Council has failed to send a breakdown of the costs and calculations to confirm what his father should be paying. Mr C wants the Council to write off or reduce the outstanding charges.
6. In May 2017 Mr D signed a document giving the Council his consent and authority to assess his financial capacity to contribute to the cost of social care services. The form notes that Mr C would be the primary contact for dealing with Mr D’s finances and invoices were to be sent to Mr C at his address.
7. In 2018 the Council updated Mr D’s income using information it had obtained from the Department of Work and Pensions. The Council wrote to Mr D care of Mr C’s address in May 2018 to tell him he would need to pay a contribution of just under £40 a week from a date in June 2018. The letter included details to show how the Council had calculated the charge.
8. In its response to Mr C’s complaint the Council said two members of the fairer charging team had met him in April 2019. The Council’s officers explained why they considered the charge was justified.
9. The Council was not at fault for writing to Mr D at Mr C’s address and sending invoices there. That was what it had agreed with the family. The Council’s letter included details to show how the charge was calculated. So there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It was Mr C’s responsibility to make arrangements for his post while his home was empty.
10. Because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, there is no basis for us to call on the Council to write off or reduce the outstanding charges.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman