Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y, that the Council did not provide enough information about the costs of Mrs Y’s care to enable her to make an informed decision. We discontinued our investigation because the Council re-considered the complaint and offered a suitable remedy for the injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y, that the Council did not provide enough information about the costs of Mrs Y’s care to enable her to make an informed decision.
2. Mrs X also said the care itself was poor and did not meet Mrs Y’s needs. Mrs Y would have cancelled the care if she had known how much it would cost. She therefore disputed the outstanding charges and asked the Council to waive them.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
4. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I considered the complaint and the information Mrs X provided.
6. I also considered the Council’ response to our written enquiries, along with relevant law and guidance.
7. Mrs 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

What happened

8. I have summarised below some key events leading to Mrs X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
9. Mrs Y suffered from dementia. She received care visits in her home to support with daily tasks.
10. Mrs X contacted the Council in July 2023 about Mrs Y’s financial assessment. She thought the Council completed this in 2022 after Mrs Y went into hospital and the Council did not say Mrs Y had to pay for her care.
11. The Council completed its financial assessment and said Mrs Y had to pay £90.03 a week for her care, backdated to April 2023.
12. Mrs X complained. She said:
• If the Council completed a financial assessment at the start, Mrs Y could have considered the costs and decided whether to continue the care package.
• The financial department did not tell Mrs Y she could include disability related expenditure (DRE) in the assessment.
• Mrs Y has little money at the end of the month and her bank account is overdrawn. She does not have the means to pay the backdated charges and had to cancel the care package.
• The standard of care from the care provider is poor. Mrs X raised this in May 2023, but the Council did not respond.
13. The Council said Mrs Y consented to a financial assessment. However, it had no evidence it sent her financial information leaflets. It apologised for this. The Council also said it wrote to Mrs Y outlining what information it needed for her financial assessment, but it apologised it did not ask for details of Mrs Y’s DRE.
14. According to the care provider, Mrs Y often declined care or was out when they called. The Council said Mrs Y has capacity to decline care if she wishes. It also said the care provider had records of the care they gave Mrs Y.
15. Mrs X remained unhappy and asked the Council to reconsider her complaint. She wrote to the Council’s finance department in February 2024, advising Mrs Y had sadly passed away and should not be liable for the outstanding charges of £2,091.96.
16. The Council sent a final complaint response. It recognised it did not send information about charging, and did not complete a financial assessment before Mrs Y’s care package started. It said it would take this forward as learning for future financial assessments. However, it did not comment on Mrs X’s request to waive the care charges.

Analysis

17. In response to my investigation, the Council told me it reconsidered Mrs X’s complaint and agreed to waive the outstanding care charges. I therefore discontinued my investigation.
18. The Council accepted failings in its financial assessment practice and will address them. We could not add to that.
19. The Council’s offer to waive the outstanding care charges is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies. I do not consider there is any significant remaining injustice to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I discontinued my investigation because the Council re-considered the complaint and offered a suitable remedy for the injustice.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman