Summary: There is no fault by the Council. The Council has offered to carry out a financial assessment to decide if Mr X’s financial contributions towards a well being charge can be reduced. Mr X has refused the financial assessment, so the Council can take no further action.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, complains that:
• Solicitors from a law firm acting for the Council or another person forged his signature on a document (dated 2015) which was submitted as evidence to the courts.
• He told the Council that his savings had fallen below the upper capital limit in July 2019 but he has still been receiving demands for payment.
• He did not want to move to his extra care housing flat and does not want to pay the extra ‘well-being charge’.
2. Mr X has not paid the well being charge and the Council has started court proceedings to recover the money he owes.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated Mr X’s complaint that his savings fell below the upper capital limit but the Council has not reassessed his financial contribution towards the well-being charge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
5. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
6. 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

7. I read the papers put in by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him.
8. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
9. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

10. The Care Act 2014 says that when charging for care services, a person with savings above the upper capital limit (£23,250) is responsible for the full cost of their care.
11. Mr X said that in July 2019 his solicitors told the Council that his savings had gone below £23,250 so he does not think he should have to pay the full well-being charge from the date.
12. The Council has said that to decide how much Mr X should pay, it needs to carry out a financial assessment. Mr X has refused a financial assessment several times, so the Council has said he needs to pay the full charge.
13. I can find no fault by the Council. Mr X can refuse a financial assessment but without evidence from this, the Council cannot reduce or waive the charge. Mr X thinks the Council should take his solicitors word that his savings have reduced but the Council, very properly, needs evidence of this.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is not upheld as I have found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

15. Mr X’s previous complaint to the Ombudsman was decided in June 2018. This complaint considered his complaint that he did not want to move to his extra care housing flat and found no fault on this point. The decision on this complaint recorded that the investigator did not investigate the demands for payment of a ‘well-being charge’ as the charge first arose more than 12 months ago and it would be unlikely fault would be found. So, I do not intend to consider these complaints as they have already been considered as part of the previous investigation.
16. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaint that Solicitors or another person added his signature to a document which will be used in the court proceedings against Mr X. As the matter refers to evidence that forms part of court proceedings, this part of the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman