Summary: Ms X complains the Council’s handling of her care contributions means she cannot afford care packages and has built up significant debt. There is no fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the way the Council assessed her contribution to care costs. She said the Council:
• did not include the correct income;
• did not take all her relevant expenditure into account; and
• failed to set up a direct debit which meant debts built up.
2. Ms X said the Council’s mistakes means she cannot afford to pay for her care package.
3. Ms X said she had to pay for her own care for a period of time when the Council failed to provide a package.
4. Ms X believes she should receive compensation for:
• the private carers she had to pay for; and
• for the upset and stress the Council has caused over the past four years.

Back to top

What I have investigated

5. I have investigated Ms X’s complaint about her care and the associated costs.
6. Paragraphs 34 and 35 set out what I have not investigated and why.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

7. 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 further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

8. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
9. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I have considered Ms X’s complaint and supporting information and have spoken to her about the complaint.
11. I have also considered the Council’s response to Ms X and to my enquiries.
12. I have written to Ms X and the Council with my draft decision and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Background

13. Ms X is disabled and uses a wheelchair. She also suffers from autism and other mental health problems.

What happened

Care contributions

14. Ms X has had ongoing problems with the funding of her care. The Council has carried out several various financial assessments over the years and Ms X’s care contributions have changed a number of times.
15. I have seen Ms X’s financial assessments, and note the Council’s reasons for the frequency of the reassessments, and the results.
16. Ms X said the payments were too high and her debts built up. The Council acknowledged Ms X’s debt problems have been ongoing for some time. It said it had set up numerous payment agreements which Ms X had not honoured. I have seen evidence of this.

Update – care contributions

17. During the course of my investigation, the Council wrote off Ms X’s debt of £2426.20 in relation to unpaid care contributions. The Council said it used its discretion due to Ms X’s vulnerable state, and the reality of the Council collecting the money being unlikely.
18. Ms X said the Council only wrote off her debt once her solicitor became involved. She said since the problems began, the Council was aware of her vulnerable mental state. She questioned why the Council took so long to write off her debts.
19. The Council said, from a Care Act 2014 perspective the Council is under no obligation to allow for personal unsecured debts. It said it is not for the Council to absorb and service personal debt. Any write-off of client contributions is done so at taxpayers’ expense and is considered a last resort.
20. The Council said the final decision to write-off Ms X’s client contribution arrears was due to her vulnerable and distressed state and was not affected by the involvement of a solicitor.

Provision of care

21. In July 2018, Ms X temporarily stayed with her stepfather. During this period, Ms X asked the Council to suspend her care.
22. The Council said when Ms X returned home, she told the Council she was unhappy with her care package. She said she coped at her stepfather’s house as it was adapted for wheelchairs. Ms X said she was receiving informal care from a friend and asked the Council to cancel care agency support.
23. The Council said it asked whether Ms X would consider a new care agency. It said Ms X declined this; she said until the issue of her debts had been resolved, it would just add to her stress levels.
24. The Council said it also asked whether Ms X would consider a direct payment so she could pay for a personal assistant. The Council said Ms X declined as she did not wish to take responsibility for this.
25. Ms X said the Council deemed her not to have capacity to manage direct payments. The Council has confirmed it did not carry out a capacity test in relation to direct payments as the principles of the act deem that a person should be treated as having capacity unless proven otherwise.
26. I have seen evidence of emails between Ms X and the Council. These show the Council remained in regular contact with Ms X, offering advice and pursuing different care options. Repeatedly, Ms X would not accept support due to her outstanding debts with the Council.

Private care costs

27. Ms X said she paid £450 for private care during a two week period when there was a gap in her care. She said this was after the Council removed the care agency following a safeguarding investigation. Ms X said the Council told her a new agency would start the following Monday but instead it was two weeks. She said the Council would not pay her back for the private care as she did not arrange it in advance with the Council. Ms X said it was an emergency.
28. In response to my enquires, the Council said it was not notified Ms X purchased her own support in an emergency for the suggested two week period.

My Findings

Care contributions

29. During the course of my investigation, the Council wrote off Ms X’s debt. It is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. I have ended this part of my investigation.

Private care costs

30. From the evidence I have seen, Ms X asked the Council to cancel her care package in July 2018. The Council maintained regular contact with Ms X and offered her different care options which she declined. Ms X said she would not consider any new care packages whilst she still had the debt hanging over her. She also complained about the agency carers being in her house and upsetting her. The evidence shows that Ms X was happy to have a friend provide informal care for her.
31. I have seen no evidence the Council’s actions resulted in Ms X experiencing a gap in her care. I have seen no evidence Ms X had to pay £450 for private care. Therefore, I have found no fault with the Council regarding the alleged gap in care.
32. I can understand why Ms X declined a formal care package for a period of time. However, the Council continued to pursue different options with her including direct payments. It was Ms X’s choice to pay for private care.

Back to top

Final decision

33. I have closed Ms X’s complaint. There is no fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

34. During the course of my investigation, Ms X raised complaints about her accommodation. This specifically related to the Council failing to adapt her current accommodation and failing to move her to more suitable accommodation.
35. I have opened a new case to deal with this separate complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman