Summary: Mr Z has made a complaint for his father who suffers from poor health. Mr Z says the Council billed Mr X for care but failed to provide information about the costs after Mr X’s free care ended. The Council has accepted it failed to give information about the costs in a timely manner and has offered to waive the charges in full. It has also offered to provide an apology and time and trouble payment. Mr Z has accepted the Council’s remedies in full.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr Z, is making a complaint for his father, who I refer to as Mr X. Mr Z has lasting power of attorney for Mr X’s affairs.
2. Mr X suffers from poor health and following a stay in hospital, he was provided with free intermediate home care by the Council. However, Mr Z says the Council then billed for care after the period of free care ended and without specifying any costs or what contribution Mr X would need to make.
3. Mr Z feels the charges are unjustified because he was not given any information with respect to the charges. As a desired outcome, he wants the Council to apologise and waive the care charges in full.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have reviewed Mr Z’s complaint to the Ombudsman and Council. I have also had regard to the responses of the Council, supporting documents and relevant legislation and policy. During my investigation, the Council accepted fault and offered a number of remedies to address this. The Council’s proposals were later accepted in full by Mr Z.

Back to top

What I found

Background and legislative framework

6. Any local authority must assess a person’s financial resources to decide whether they should pay for their own care needs. The legal framework for charging is set out in sections 14 and 17 of the Care Act 2014.
7. The local authority must not charge for certain types of care and support which must be arranged free. This includes intermediate care which must be provided free of charge for up to six weeks.
8. Paragraph 11.3 of the Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014 says:

“The personal budget is the mechanism that, in conjunction with the care and support plan, or support plan, enables the person, and their advocate if they have one, to exercise greater choice and take control over how their care and support needs are met. It means knowing, before care and support planning begins, an estimate of how much money will be available to meet a person’s assessed needs and, with the final personal budget, having clear information about the total amount of the budget, including proportion the local authority will pay, and what amount (if any) the person will pay".

Chronology of events

9. In January 2020, Mr X was referred to the Council’s intermediate care unit where he was assessed as requiring two visits each week by a support worker. The Council visits continued until March when lockdown restrictions were announced due to Covid-19. Mr Z received a telephone call stating the Council was stopping visits with immediate effect. Mr Z was concerned about the sudden effect of the care ending and sought to make alternative arrangements.
10. It was agreed the intermediate care would end in March 2020, after which Mr Z would arrange for private care for Mr X. However, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, Mr Z experienced problems arranging private care for Mr X. It was therefore agreed that a request for a care package be arranged. A care plan was devised and the Council made a referral to its finances team to assess the level of contribution Mr X would need to make towards his long-term care.
11. In March 2020, the Council conducted a financial assessment to find out Mr X’s level of contribution to the care costs.
12. In July 2020, Mr Z says the Council telephoned him and said that it was creating a bill for the care provided following March 2020. Mr Z said he escalated this matter as he was unaware the care would be chargeable. Mr Z also cancelled the care being provided by the Council.
13. In August 2020, the Council stopped providing Mr X care. Mr Z complained to the Council. He said that at no time was charging for the care discussed. Mr Z says the only time he was made aware of charges was in July 2020 and that the Council was compiling a bill for the chargeable care. He also complained that the charges were incorrect as visits to Mr X averaged eight minutes by carers and not the agreed 30 minutes as stated in the care plan.
14. In October 2020, the Council responded to Mr Z not upholding the complaint. It did however reduce the charges.
15. In January 2021, the Council issued its final response to Mr Z on the subject of his complaint. It said it believed it was proportionate and fair to charge for the care package for the reasons stated in the findings from the investigation. It confirmed these charges would not be waived.
16. The Council later accepted that it failed to provide Mr Z with a copy of the financial assessment and discuss care charges in a timely manner.

My findings

17. The Council sought to bill Mr X for care it provided between April and July 2020 when the free intermediate care ended in March 2020. Mr Z says charges were never discussed with the Council and as such, they are unfair and without merit.
18. As part of my investigation, the Council has accepted that it failed to provide Mr Z with a copy of the financial assessment and discuss charges in a timely manner. In my view, this fault prevented Mr X and Mr Z from knowing with any certainty that he would be billed for the care. I do therefore consider the fault caused Mr X an injustice. On this basis, the Council decided to uphold the complaint and has offered a number of remedies which are acceptable to Mr Z.

Back to top

Agreed action

19. To remedy the fault and injustice identified, the Council has agreed to take the following actions by 1 September 2021:

• Provide Mr X and Mr Z a written apology which addresses the fault and injustice identified above.
• Waive the care charges in full.
• Pay Mr Z £150 in recognition of the time and trouble he has experienced.

Back to top

Final decision

20. The Council was at fault for failing to provide timely information regarding care charges and the outcome of the financial assessment. This meant Mr Z was unable to make an informed decision about whether he wanted the care to continue for Mr X. This meant Mr X suffered an injustice and the Council has agreed to provide a number of remedies.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman