Summary: The Council is at fault as it failed to carry out a review of Mrs Y care and support needs after six weeks to determine if a care package was meeting her needs. The Council’s fault contributed to Mr X and Mrs Y not cancelling the care package when she no longer wanted it which she incurred costs for. The Council has agreed to waive half of Mrs Y’s outstanding care charges to remedy her injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains on behalf of Mrs Y. He complains the Council:

• told him that Mrs Y’s care would be free for the first six weeks.
• should have carried out a review after the first six weeks as it had undertaken to do. Had it done so, the Council would have cancelled the care as Mrs Y did not want it.
• delayed in cancelling the care.

2. Mr X considers that as a result the Council is wrongly charging Mrs Y for the care.

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. I have:

• Considered the complaint and the information provided by Mr X;
• Discussed the issues with Mr X;
• Made enquiries of the Council and considered the information provided;
• Invited Mr X and the Council to comment on the draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Councils can make charges for care and support services they provide or arrange. Charges may only cover the cost the council incurs. (Care Act 2014, section 14)

What happened

7. Mr X contacted the Council in December 2017 for support for Mrs Y as Mr Y who cared for Mrs Y was admitted to hospital.
8. Officers A and B, social workers, visited Mrs Y to carry out an assessment of her care and support needs. They considered Mrs Y was eligible for a home care package. Mr X has said the officers advised that the first six weeks of care would be free of charge. The Council has said the officers explained that home care services were not free of charge and that a financial assessment would be required to establish how much Mrs Y should pay. The Council’s record of the visit does not record any discussion about charging for the care.
9. The Council wrote to Mrs Y on 31 January 2018 to confirm her home care package would start on 7 February and the name of the provider. The letter said the care would initially be provided for six weeks and during the six week period an officer would carry out a review to consider whether Mrs Y’s needs had changed. The letter also said that the Council would send a form for Mrs Y to complete with details of her income, savings and outgoings. This information would be used to calculate how much Mrs Y needed to pay towards the cost of her care.
10. The care package started on 7 February 2018. Officer A contacted Mr X on 8 February 2018 to check the care had started. Officer A’s record of the call notes Mrs Y is happy with the care. Officer A also notes she told Mr X that she was ending her involvement.
11. In February 2018, the Council sent documents for Mr X to complete for Mrs Y’s financial assessment and a factsheet about paying towards a personal budget for care at home. The factsheet set out who was exempt from paying towards their personal budget. It explained everyone else had to have a financial assessment to see how much they could afford to contribute. Mr X returned the financial assessment documents in March.
12. The Council assessed Mrs Y as needing to pay £80.91 towards her personal budget which would increase to £87.50 in April 2018. The Council wrote to Mrs Y in April 2018 notifying her of contribution. It also sent an invoice for £566.37 for her contributions since the start of her care package.
13. The Council’s records show Mr X contacted the Council on 22 April about Mrs Y’s care bill. The record notes Mr X said the hospital told him that the first six weeks of Mrs Y’s care would be free. Mr X contacted the Council again on 27 April. The Council’s record notes Mr X said he wanted to cancel Mrs Y’s care. Mr X says the officer he spoke to said it would be cancelled. Mr X says he contacted the Council again on 30 April as the carers were still calling. In response to my enquiries the Council has said it did not cancel Mrs Y’s care package immediately until the request could be discussed in person with Mrs Y.
14. On 4 May, officer C, a reviewing officer, visited Mrs Y to review her care and support needs. The review noted Mr X and Mr and Mrs Y said she was no longer in need of the care. The carer records showed that Mr and Mrs Y were refusing care.
15. The records of officer C’s visit note she told Mrs Y she would cancel the care package and suggested to Mr X he may want to cancel the calls with the care provider on a daily basis until the care package was closed.
16. Officer C made a request for the care package to be cancelled immediately but the care provider continued to call. Officer C contacted the care provider on 9 May to cancel the care calls. I note the Council sent a credit note to Mr X on 17 February 2020 to waive the charges between 30 April and 6 May 2018.
17. Mr X made a complaint to the Council in June 2018. He raised that the hospital and Council told him the first six weeks of care would be free and the Council had not carried out a review after six weeks. Had it done so Mrs Y would have cancelled the care. Mr X also complained the carers continued to visit after he had cancelled the care and he continued to receive invoices.
18. I understand the Council met with Mr X in October 2018 to discuss his complaint. It wrote to him in January 2019 to advise the Council would waive the charges for the first six weeks. This would leave a debt of £511.82. Mr X says he contacted the Council by telephone in late January 2019 as he was unhappy with the response but did not receive a response.
19. The Council sent a demand for £511.82 to Mrs Y in May 2019 and warned of possible court proceedings. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in June 2019. The Council said it would not waive Mrs Y’s care charges in full as it had no record of Mr X contacting the Council before May to cancel the care package.
20. In response to my enquires the Council has said it has waived the charges between 23 April and 4 May 2018.

My assessment

21. Mr X says the Council told him Mrs Y’s care would be free for six weeks. The Council says officers explained Mrs Y would be charged a client contribution for the duration of her care. There is no record of the discussion in the case notes. So, I cannot know what information was provided to Mr X and Mrs Y. But the Council has waived Mrs Y’s client contribution for the first six weeks so I cannot achieve any more for Mr X and Mrs Y by pursing the matter further.
22. The Council’s letter of 31 January 2018 stated it would carry out a review of Mrs Y’s care during the first six weeks to see if her needs had changed. There is no evidence to show such a review was carried out. This is fault.
23. Mr X considers Mrs Y would have cancelled the care had the review taken place so Mrs Y would not have incurred the care costs. Mr X and Mrs Y did not contact the Council about cancelling the care package. The Council’s letter of 31 January 2018 and the factsheet sent with the financial assessment gave sufficient information for Mr X to know Mrs Y would have to contribute to her care package even if they thought the first six weeks was free. So, it is appropriate to consider that Mr X could have contacted the Council after the six weeks had passed, particularly if Mrs Y no longer wanted the care which she would be charged for. However, had the Council carried out the review when it should have done, then it is likely Mr X and Mrs Y would have been prompted to cancel the care.
24. So, I consider the Council’s failure to carry out the review contributed to Mrs Y not cancelling her care package after six weeks. It is therefore appropriate and proportionate for the Council to waive half the outstanding charges in recognition of this.
25. The Council would have to carry out a review of Mrs Y’s care before cancelling the care package. So, on balance, it is not at fault for not cancelling the care package immediately on Mr X’s contact of 22 April. I will not investigate if there was delay in arranging the review as the Council says it waived Mrs Y’s charges from 23 April to 6 May 2018. So, I cannot achieve any more for Mr X and Mrs Y by investigating the matter further.
26. The Council’s complaints procedure provides it should respond to complaints within 20 working days. Mr X made his complaint in June 2018. I understand the Council met with Mr X in October 2018 but it did not respond in writing until January 2019. This is an excessive amount of time and is fault. The Council’s complaints procedure is one stage so the Council should have notified Mr X of his right to make a complaint to the Ombudsman in this letter rather than considering Mr X’s complaint further in June 2019. This prolonged Mr X’s complaint which will have caused frustration to him. The Council should apologise to Mr X.
27. The Council has said it has reviewed its adult social care complaints procedure since Mr X’s complaint which should prevent the faults experienced by Mr X from recurring.

Agreed action

28. That the Council will:
1. Send a written apology to Mr X for the frustration caused by not considering his complaint in accordance with its complaints’ procedure.
2. Waive half of Mrs Y’s outstanding client contributions to acknowledge its failure to carry out a review of her care and support needs after six weeks contributed to Mr X and Mrs Y not cancelling her care package. The Council should send an invoice to Mrs Y for the remaining half of the charges detailing the periods for when these charges were accrued.
3. Review its procedures to ensure the Council is implementing its policy of reviewing care and support needs after six weeks to see if the care package is meeting the service user’s needs.
29. The Council should take the action at a) and b) within one month of my final decision and the action at c) within three months of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

30. The Council is at fault as it failed to carry out a review of Mrs Y care and support needs after six weeks to determine if a care package was meeting her needs. The Council’s fault contributed to Mr X and Mrs Y not cancelling the care package when she no longer wanted it. The Council has agreed to waive half of Mrs Y’s outstanding care charges which is a proportionate remedy for Mrs Y’s injustice. I have therefore completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman