Summary: Ms C complained the Council issued a wrong invoice, which it has later failed to correct. We found there was fault, for which the Council has already apologised. It has also identified suitable actions to try and ensure this will not happen again.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms C, complained to us on behalf of her mother. Ms C complained the Council issued a wrong invoice and, when she told the Council, it could not issue her a changed one.

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 an organisation’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 considered the information I received from Ms C and the Council. I shared a copy of my draft decision with Ms C and the Council and considered and comments I received, before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms C says she has always paid all invoices related to her mother’s care on time. However, the Council issued an invoice in September 2021 that was wrong, because the Council charged her mother for care she did not receive while she was in hospital.
6. Ms C says she immediately contacted the Council who acknowledged she had been overcharged and said it would try and find out what had gone wrong.
7. The Council then tried to contact the care provider, but the care provider did not respond. When Ms C received an automatic payment reminder letter from the Council to pay the incorrect invoice, she contacted the Council again. The Council explained that its system was unfortunately unable to produce a new invoice for the correct amount, which is what Ms C wanted.
8. However, the Council suggested that if Ms C would pay the (incorrect) invoice, it would adjust the next invoice accordingly so her mother would not have paid too much in the end.
9. Ms C did not accept this as a solution and insisted that she wanted a correct invoice that she would pay immediately once received.
10. Ms C told me she did not hear anything further from the Council and believed the Council was looking into the matter further. However, she said she then received a final warning letter from the Council in December 2021, threatening her with court action if she did not pay the invoice.
11. Ms C made a complaint to the Council about what had happened. The Council explained its system automatically generated the letter and it apologised to her for the distress the events had caused. It explained her mother’s homecare provider had amended the hours her mother had actually received in August 2021, but the provider subsequently entered this into its system incorrectly in a way that meant Ms M was still charged for more hours.
12. The Council has told me that:
• It has reviewed its invoicing system, as part of the response to this complaint. This found the issue is about care providers not updating the portal with changes to care quickly, rather than the invoicing system not being able to issue adjustment notices. 
• The Council is looking at the feasibility of implementing a particular billing module, which may allow for adjustment notices to be issued. This work is in its early stages, and it will therefore be some time it makes a decision. This is part of an ongoing project which will also consider whether it is suitable and cost effective to invoice more regularly. 
• Further, because of the complaint, and the issue of care providers not updating the portal with changes to the care provided in a timely manner to ensure the correct invoices are issued, it will carry out a review of the communications with care providers and to identify if there is a further training need.
• The team can place a hold on reminders where the invoice is disputed but we would not do so in this circumstance. This is because the Council properly invoiced based on the care the provider said the client had received. Until such time the provider amends the care charges in the portal, the invoice is correct and due. 

Analysis

13. The Council explained why Ms C’s mother received an incorrect invoice and why its system was unable to reissue an invoice for the correct amount.
14. I found that, under the circumstances, it made a reasonable suggestion to resolve the issue (see paragraph 8).
15. The Council has already apologised to Ms C, which I find to be an appropriate remedy. It has also explained, in response to my draft decision, what steps it has done, and will do, in response to Ms C’s complaint to try and avoid a reoccurrence, which I found to be appropriate.
16. In this case, the Council should have put a hold on reminders because (until it made the suggestion referred to in paragraph 8 above) it was entirely reasonable for Ms C not to pay an invoice that she was disputing, until this was solved.

Back to top

Final decision

17. For reasons explained above, I found there was fault.
18. I am satisfied with the actions the Council has carried out, and will carry out, to remedy this and have therefore decided to complete my investigation and close the case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman