Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has incorrectly charged her mother, Mrs C, for the cost of her care. She says carers visits were often shorter than what has been charged which meant Mrs C was being asked to pay for care she did not receive. There was fault by the Council with the amount Mrs C was asked to pay. The Council has agreed to apologise and remind the care provider about the importance of submitting accurate information, in addition to the remedy it has already provided by reducing the amount owed by Mrs C.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains on behalf of her mother, Mrs C, that the Council charged her for care she did not receive. She says carers were attending for less than 15 minutes but were charging for a 30-minute visit. Mrs X says this meant Mrs C was asked to pay for care she did not receive.

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’. 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)
3. 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

4. I read the information provided by Mrs X and spoke to her about the complaint. I also considered the information provided by the Council in response to my enquiries.
5. I invited Mrs X and the Council to comment on a draft decision and considered comments made in response.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs C received care at home in the form of two 30-minute visits per day. She was assessed as needing to contribute financially towards her care.
7. Carers recorded the times they attended Mrs C’s property in a logbook which remained with Mrs C. Mrs X says the times recorded were around 8 to 10 minutes, but she was still invoiced for the scheduled 30-minute visit.
8. Mrs X says she made the Council aware of the shorter visits on numerous occasions, but no action was taken to address the issue.
9. Mrs X made a formal complaint to the Council and presented the evidence she had about the shorter visits. The Council investigated and reduced the outstanding balance, charging for Mrs C’s care at the care agency’s 15-minute rate.
10. Mrs X said this meant Mrs C was still being charged for care she did not receive, as the visits were often shorter than 15 minutes.
11. Mrs X said the care provided was the bare minimum and carers did not enter into conversation with Mrs C.

My findings

12. In response to my enquiries, the Council said Mrs C was informed of the need to contribute to her care in client contribution letters that were sent to her. The letters stated how much Mrs C would need to contribute but said if the amount due was lower than the contribution, then Mrs C would just pay for the actual cost of the care service.
13. The Council also told me that it asks care providers to submit actual time spent at a service users’ property into its payment system. It asks times to be submitted to the nearest 15 minutes.
14. There is no explanation as to how the care charges are calculated in the client contribution letter, so a service user would not be aware that care is charged in 15-minute blocks. This was fault.
15. Mrs X says she told the Council about the amount due being incorrect on numerous occasions when she received an invoice, but no action was taken until she made a formal complaint. The Council did have an opportunity to resolve this sooner.
16. The care provider had submitted time sheets for the originally scheduled 30-minute visits rather than the actual time spent with Mrs C. This meant the Council invoiced Mrs C for 30-minute care when the visits were in fact much shorter. This was fault.
17. This caused injustice to Mrs C by asking her to pay more than she should have been charged. The Council has already partially remedied this by reducing the cost chargeable to Mrs C to the care agency’s 15-minute rate.
18. I do not find fault with the Council declining to further reduce the amount due as the visits may have been shorter than 15 minutes. Care is charged to the nearest 15 minutes so the shortest visit would be charged at the 15-minute rate.

Back to top

Agreed action

19. In addition to the remedy already provided, the Council has agreed to take the following action within one month of the final decision;

• issue a written apology to Mrs C for charging the incorrect amount and the delay in resolving the issue,
• remind the care provider of the importance of submitting accurate information which impacts on what a service user is charged, and
• review the information it provides to service users about how care will be charged.

20. Evidence of completing the above remedies should be provided to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I uphold a finding of fault against the Council for the reasons detailed in this decision. The Council has agreed to provide the remedies listed for the injustice caused by its faults.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman