Summary: Mr X complains about the way the Council tried to recover costs for the late Mrs Y’s care charges. The Ombudsman finds fault as the Council sent demands with incorrect costs. This left Mrs Y’s husband believing he had to pay more for Mrs Y’s care costs. The Council has agreed to write off the remaining care costs, and review its procedures for invoicing.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the way the Council tried to recover costs for the late Mrs Y’s care charges. Mr X also complains the Council’s letters demanding payment suggest people should pay by direct debit.
2. Mr X says this left Mrs Y’s husband, Mr Y, anxious and upset as he thought the charges were too high.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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

5. As part of this investigation:
• I considered the complaint made by Mr X and the Council’s response.
• I considered the Council’s response to my enquiries.
• I discussed the complaint with Mr X over the telephone.
• I considered the Care Act 2014.
• I sent a draft of this decision to Mr X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

6. Sections 14 and 17 of the Care Act 2014 set out the legal framework for charging for care. A council should not charge more than the cost it incurs in meeting the assessed needs of the person.
7. Where a council has decided to charge for care it must carry out a financial assessment of what a person can afford to pay. Once the financial assessment is complete a council must provide a written record of the assessment.
8. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014 (the Guidance) says when designing their system for debt recovery in social care, councils should be aware of the population they are dealing with. Much of this is debt is likely to be from a move into care homes of very frail people in their 80s and 90s, many with dementia. All debt recovery systems should be designed with a full understanding of the needs and capacities of this population to engage with the system being designed.
9. The Guidance makes clear a debt becomes due at the date the sum is due to be paid to the Council.
10. Council’s should advise people of the ways to pay a debt for care costs that others in similar circumstances would usually consider. Council should provide people with a range of information and advice to help them decide how to pay.

Background

11. Mrs Y lives with her husband Mr Y. Mr X is her personal representative. Mrs Y received home care however, in early November 2018 she moved into a care home temporarily. Mrs Y left the care home on 20 November 2018. Shortly after the Council arranged with Mr X to carry out a financial assessment on Mrs Y so it could assess what she had to pay towards her care costs.
12. In late November 2018 the Council sent Mrs Y an invoice for the full cost of her care for the period she was in the care home. This amounted to £1,033.06.
13. The Council carried out the financial assessment on 4 December 2018. It wrote to Mrs Y on 5 December 2018 to say her weekly contribution was £178.55 for the time she spent in the care home.
14. The Council sent Mrs Y a letter asking for payment of £1,033.06. The letter also provided information on paying care charges by direct debit. The Council then sent out a revised invoice on, 28 December 2018, specifying the correct amount, £637.68, Mrs Y had to pay. The payment date for this invoice was 21 January 2019.
15. In early January 2019 Mr X emailed the Council querying the demand letter it previously sent out as the financial assessment assessed Mrs Y’s care charges at £178.55 per week.
16. The Council sent out a final demand letter to Mrs Y saying if the outstanding debt is not paid within 7 days the Council will take further action to recover it. On the same day the Council also contacted Mr X to tell him its system automatically sent the demand letter and it would put a stop on this. It also advised its system had sent a further demand letter to Mrs Y.
17. On 21 January 2019 Mr Y paid the care charges however, the Council issued a further invoice for £637.68. In March 2019 Mrs Y passed away.
18. In April 2019 Mr X raised a formal complaint to the Council. He complained the Council sent a chaser letter with the wrong amount to Mrs Y after she had a financial assessment three weeks previous. He also said the Council sent a final demand, prior to the deadline for payment, which caused Mr Y distress. Mr X also complains the Council should not be asking for payment by direct debit and Mr Y received further invoices after he made payment on 21 January 2019.
19. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint and apologised for the distress caused to Mr Y. It said its financial assessment team does not have access to adjust the automatically generated letters, therefore Mr Y received a demand for payment on 27 December 2018. The revised invoice sent at the end of December 2018 would not have been passed to the income collection team until January 2019 and may not have been seen prior to the final demand being sent out. The Council said there was a balance left on the account of £264.48 for home care charges.
20. Mr X remained dissatisfied so complained to the Ombudsman. The Council has since agreed to write off the outstanding debt of £264.48.

Analysis

21. Mr X says the Council should not be sending incorrect invoices and demands for payment to elderly people. He says after the Council completed the financial assessment for Mrs Y it should not have sent another demand for the original payment.
22. From the evidence I have seen there was fault by the Council in how it sought to recover payments from Mrs and Mr Y.
23. Given the financial assessment took place on 4 December 2018 it was reasonable to expect the Council not to send out a demand for payment for the incorrect amount. I accept the Council quickly corrected this by sending out the correct invoice for the charges on 28 December 2018.
24. Both Mr X and the Council said the payment due date for the charges was 21 January 2019. However, the Council sent a final demand saying it would take further action if Mr Y did not pay the debt within 7 days. This was fault as Mr and Mrs Y had until 21 January 2019 to make the payment.
25. The Council explained that its system automatically generates reminder letters and it is likely Mrs Y’s account had not been looked at by the income collection team ahead of the final demand letter. However, the final demand letter was for the £637.68 specified in the revised invoice. This suggests the income collection team may have been aware of the revised invoice as the amount from the previous demand had been altered.
26. The Council also sent Mr Y a further invoice for £637.68 in April 2019, after he had made payment for the residential care costs. Again, this is fault.
27. Mr X also complained the Council is asking people to pay care charges by direct debit. The Council’s letters specify different options for people to pay for care costs with direct debit being one such option. I do not find fault here as the Council is merely advising people of different ways to pay so they can make an informed decision. This is in line with the Guidance mentioned in paragraph 10.
28. The demand letters from the Council caused Mr Y injustice as the Council was chasing him for amounts he did not feel he owed or was expecting. The Council has agreed to write off the outstanding home care charges of £264.48 as a remedy. I find this to be appropriate for the injustice caused to Mr Y however, I would go further and recommend the Council reviews its system for chasing payments to ensure a person’s account details are updated and shared with the income collection team prior to chasing letters being sent.

Agreed action

29. Within four weeks of my final decision the Council agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
• Write off the remaining £264.48 care costs.
• Confirm it will review its debt recovery system as soon as possible to ensure a person’s account details are updated and shared with the income collection team prior to chasing letters being sent out. The Council should let the Ombudsman know by when the review will have happened.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I have completed my investigation and found fault causing injustice. I have made recommendations to remedy this injustice which the Council has accepted.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman