Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about paying for care. This is because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained her mother and father, Mr and Mrs D, were not told they would have to pay for care following Mrs D’s discharge from hospital in October 2023. Mrs B says councils should ensure patients or their relatives sign a document to say they agree to pay for care rather than have a tick box which shows they had the conversation, as in this case it did not happen. Mrs B says the Council should remove the costs as her father did not agree to pay for care. Mrs B says carers only stayed for three minutes at a time but Mrs D has been charged for half hour calls.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council’s case notes dated 12, 14 July 2023 and 26, 30, and 31 October 2023 refer to discussions, explanations and sending of charging literature about paying for care, the need for a financial assessment and explanation of paying the full cost of the care package if finances are above £23, 250. While Mrs B is concerned Mr D had no knowledge of paying there are specific records referring to discussions with Mr D and Mrs D who has capacity, about charging for care. There are two references to booklets about paying for care, 12 July, and 30 October, being sent to Mrs D at her home address. While Mrs B says these were not received, we could not say what happened to them. The Council’s records show they were posted. Records evidence Mr and Mrs D were advised and informed about charges for care and there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an investigation by us.
6. The Occupational Therapist (OT) Discharge Report says a long-term care package of care is recommended which is chargeable. It says this was discussed with Mr and Mrs D on 25 October and a financial leaflet was given. Mrs B disputes this and says this did not happen. We could not make a finding on what was said when we were not present.
7. Mrs B says carers only stayed three minutes not half hour. I have not considered this point. Mrs B will need to raise this as a separate complaint with the Council so it can investigate the timing of care calls to determine if any reduction in the fees is required.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman