Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council charged her for domiciliary care. We do not consider there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating her complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council) told her it would not charge her for domiciliary care after she left hospital. Ms X says the Council later charged her for that care, which caused her anxiety and stress. She would like the Council to waive its invoice and provide training to staff to ensure similar fault does not happen to others.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. They may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if they believe it is unlikely they would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. Ms X had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In late February 2022 a hospital admitted Ms X after she broke her leg. During the four-week admission, a Social Worker planned Ms X’s discharge home.
8. In early March, the Social Worker assessed Ms X’s needs and after considering various options, decided Ms X could return home with a care package. The Social Worker noted: “[Ms X] is aware that this is a chargeable service but [Ms X] informs that she has no savings and on benefits”. The next day, the Social Worker visited Ms X again, and noted: “I informed [Ms X] that I will complete paperwork for assessed care through brokerage thats [sic] chargeable”.
9. In late March, Ms X moved home when the care package started.
10. In late April, Ms X called the Council to cancel the care package. She said the Council told her she would need to pay for the care from the day it started.
11. In early May, the Council wrote to Ms X to confirm how much she needed to pay towards her care since late March.
12. I do not consider there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions that would justify the Ombudsman investigating. I will explain why.
13. The Council’s records showed the Social Worker told Ms X twice that her care would be chargeable.
14. I have not seen any evidence in March the Social Worker told Ms X she would not need to pay toward her care because of her benefits. I do not doubt Ms X’s version of events as she remembers them. However, there is no independent corroborating evidence to warrant an investigation into what was said between Ms X and the Social Worker.
15. I am also unlikely to find fault with the Council’s financial assessment of Ms X. That assessment was in line with the Care and Support Statutory Guidance 2014.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I do not consider we should investigate this complaint because I am unlikely to find fault with the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman