Summary: There was delay by the Council in telling a family of the cost of care for Mr X in his home. The family were made aware there would be a financial contribution towards the care costs and had previously decided they did not wish to arrange care through the Council because of this. The Council has already offered a remedy of an apology, an offer to carry out a financial reassessment and an offer of a payment plan so no further action will be taken as the injustice has been remedied before the complaint was made to the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms D, complaints for her father, Mr X. Ms D complains the family were not told that care would be chargeable until 5 months after the care for her father started.
2. Ms D also complains the care provided was of a poor standard and not for the full time period charged.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I read the papers put in by Ms D.
6. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
7. Ms D and the organisation 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

Law and guidance

8. A council has a duty to arrange care and support for those with eligible needs, and a power to meet both eligible and non-eligible needs in places other than care homes. A council can choose to charge for non-residential care following a person’s needs assessment. Where it decides to charge, the council must follow the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and have regard to the Care Act statutory guidance. (Care Act 2014, section 14 and 17)
9. Where a council has decided to charge for care, it must carry out a financial assessment to decide what a person can afford to pay. It must then give the person a written record of the completed assessment. Councils have no power to assess couples according to their joint financial resources. A council must treat each person individually. A council must not charge more than the cost it incurs to meet a person’s assessed eligible needs.
10. People receiving care and support other than in a care home need to keep a certain level of income to cover their living costs. Councils’ financial assessments can take a person’s income and capital into consideration, but not the value of their home. After charging, a person’s income must not reduce below a weekly amount known as the minimum income guarantee (MIG). This is set by national government and reviewed each year. A council can allow people to keep more than the MIG. (Care Act 2014)

Key facts

11. The Council wrote to Mr X in April 2022 to say a financial assessment had shown he would need to pay the full cost of care services due to his savings and rental income.
12. A social worker visited Mr and Mrs X in April 2023. Ms D was present. I can see from the notes that the social worker explained that family would need to complete a financial assessment form and this would determine if the family would need to self fund or contribute financially to the cost of care. At this point, Mr X was paying a carer privately. The family did not complete the financial assessment form.
13. The care assessment identified Mr X needed three visits per day (two 45 minute and one 30 minute call), 7 days per week.
14. The care started on 1 May 2023. The care finished on 23 November 2023, when Ms D cancelled the care after receiving a backdated invoice.

Care costs

15. There was delay by the Council, which it apologised for in its response to Ms D’s official complaint. The Council did not carry out a new financial assessment in 2023 and make the family aware of the exact costs of the care package before or soon after it started. This delay was fault. However, the Council did tell the family a financial assessment would need to be carried out and sent them the forms before the care started. As the family did not complete them, the Council used the figures given in a previous assessment.
16. Ms D complains the Council did not tell the family that care would be chargeable until five months after the care package started. There is evidence that this was not the case. The social workers notes show that Mr X’s wife had previously been told that due to their rental income they would need to contribute financially and she had decided not to go ahead with the care because of the cost. Also, the notes of the meeting that Ms D attended show the family were told there would a financial contribution towards the cost of the care.
17. While there was delay in invoicing by the Council, I do not believe this caused a significant injustice to the family. The family were clearly aware that there would be a financial contribution towards care costs and did not return the financial assessment forms. The Council has already apologised to the family, offered to carry out a new financial assessment if the forms are completed and to arrange a payment plan. I consider the remedy already offered by the Council to be a suitable remedy to the injustice for delay. As Mr X used the care services, I do not see any grounds for the costs to be waived.

Standard of care

18. Ms D has raised concerns about the standard of care for Mr X and the length of care visits.
19. I have looked at the logs of the care staff and cannot see any evidence the care visits were shorter than they should have been. Without evidence, there is nothing further that I can investigate and I find no fault on this point.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is upheld. No further action is needed as the remedy offered by the Council during its complaints process is a satisfactory remedy to the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman