Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed in assessing Mr Y’s contribution towards his care home charges and in providing invoices for these charges. She also complained the Council delayed in responding to her queries which caused difficulties in managing Mr Y’s finances. We found the Council’s errors and delays in assessing Mr Y’s contribution and in issuing invoices are fault. These faults have caused Ms X an injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X complained the Council delayed in assessing Mr Y’s contribution towards his care home charges and in providing invoices for these charges.
2. The Council also delayed in responding to Ms X’s correspondence and queries regarding Mr Y’s finances.
3. This caused Ms X significant distress, uncertainty, and difficulty in managing Mr Y’s finances, and affected her wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. 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

6. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Ms X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
7. Ms 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 here

8. Mr Y moved into a care home in June 2023. Prior to that he lived in a property owned by Ms X where he received a package of care. The Council wrote to Ms X on 22 June 2023 to confirm Mr Y’s contribution towards the cost of his care at the care home. It noted Mr Y’s placement at the care home was for four weeks and was categorised as a temporary stay.
9. The Council told Ms X it did not carry out financial assessments for short stays in residential care but instead charged a flat rate of £130.55 per week. It also advised that if Mr Y’s stay changed to long term care the Council would carry out a financial assessment.
10. Ms X asked for any invoices and correspondence to be sent to her by email, rather to Mr Y’s home. She also asked for clarification on how the contribution would be paid once Mr Y was confirmed as a permanent resident of the care home. The Council reiterated it would carry out a financial assessment if Mr Y’s stay at the care home became long term. It also suggested Ms X could set up a direct debit to pay his contribution.
11. As Ms X had only received one invoice, she contacted the Council in September 2023 to check the Council still had her email address on record. There is no record the Council responded. Ms X chased the Council again in October 2023, noting she had not received an invoice for August or September 2023.
12. In late October 2023 Ms X found a letter the Council had sent to Mr Y. She asked the Council to send all correspondence to her and again asked for details of Mr Y’s contribution and any outstanding balances.
13. Ms X chased the Council again in November and early December 2023. On 10 December 2023 Ms X raised a formal complaint. She complained she had not received an invoice since July 2023 and could not financially plan or manage Mr Y’s finances without understanding what payments were due and the future costs.
14. The Council responded on 11 December 2023 and noted Ms X had completed a financial declaration form. It said an officer would contact Ms X the following day to discuss the type of care Mr Y was receiving and details of Mr Y’s finances. They would then be able to calculate Mr Y’s contribution if he was to go to the care home. Ms X confirmed Mr Y moved to the care home in June 2023 and did not own a property or have any savings. She reiterated she was anxious about the accruing costs.
15. The following day the Council confirmed it had assessed Mr Y’s contribution as £130.55 per week for the trial period 11 June 2023 to 8 July 2023, and £422.74 per week from 9 July 2023. The Council also noted that due to an error on its system it had not issued invoices since 9 July 2023. In apologised for this error and advised that Mr Y now owed £9,783.47 for the period 9 July to 17 December 2023. The Council said it would issue an invoice for this sum soon.
16. The Council did not issue an invoice for the £9,783.47.
17. Ms X told the Council that she was keen to settle the invoices but reminded the Council that Mr Y’s private pensions were not paid monthly but in three instalments each year. She asked if it was possible to invoice quarterly or in line with his pension payments. Ms X also told the Council that Mr Y did not have £9,700 in his account and asked for guidance on how this could be resolved.
18. The following week Ms X contacted the Council again as she had received an invoice for £48. She asked to set up a payment plan as Mr Y did not have the money to pay the full sums due. Ms X told the Council this was causing her distress, anxiety and worry and she wanted a clear view on how to manage the situation.
19. Ms X chased the Council for a response in early January 2024 and again later that month when she received a further invoice for £48. She again asked for clarity on the costs Mr Y owed as the situation was making her unwell.
20. On 22 January 2024 the Council confirmed the invoices for £48 related to care Mr X received at home. It also said that if Mr Y moved to a care home his assessed contribution was £130.55 per week. Ms X reiterated that Mr Y had been at the care home since June 2023 and asked how she could pay some of the outstanding balance and set up a payment plan.
21. As Ms X did not receive a response, she contacted the Council’s complaints team in early February 2024 asking for details of the complaint process and how to escalate her complaint. Ms X contacted the Council again later that month explaining she was suffering from severe anxiety, was unable to sleep and had lost weight because of the situation. She said she was scared to buy Mr X new clothes or underwear as she did not know whether she could use the money in his account because she did not know what the care costs were. Ms X told the Council she was also having panic attacks about the Council sending debt collectors and bailiffs to her home.
22. In a subsequent email Ms X told the Council she was experiencing financial challenges due to the lack of clarity regarding Mr Y’s care charges. Ms X said she was paying for things she could not afford to cover Mr Y’s costs.
23. On 5 March 2024 the Council then wrote to Ms X with details of Mr Y’s contributions. It confirmed it had now updated its systems and paid the care home for Mr Y’s placement. The Council calculated Mr Y’s contributions for the period 9 July 2023 to 10 March 2024 at £14,856.35. It confirmed the Council would be happy to accept instalment payments.
24. The Council sent Ms X an invoice for £14,856.35, and Ms X made a payment of £8,400. The Council then sent regular four-weekly invoices which Ms X has paid.
25. In addition, the Council advised Ms X on 26 March that her complaint had been allocated to an officer to respond. As the officer was currently away from the office they would not be able to respond until May 2024. It said the officer had noted there were delays in confirming Mr Y’s contributions, and explained this was due to a recording error which prevented the Council from submitting bills for long term residential care. The Council said there were a series of communication errors internally which it needed to address. It confirmed there was fault and apologised. The Council also said the officer would provide a fuller explanation.
26. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint on 3 May 2024 and apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused. It accepted it should have responded sooner to Ms X’s requests for clarity. The Council said it endeavours to review financial declaration forms and confirm assessed contributions within 28 days of receiving the forms. It failed to do so in this instance and when Ms X’s queries were passed to the financial assessment team they were not immediately picked up.
27. The Council also upheld Ms X’s complaint about delays in issuing bills for Mr Y’s care. It said the delay was due to Mr Y’s stay at the care home being recorded as temporary rather than permanent. Because it was recorded as temporary the case management system would not generate bills for Mr Y’s care. The Council said this was identified and rectified in February 2024. This meant the first bill was for a significant backdated sum.
28. In addition the Council noted Mr Y’s address was recorded on its invoicing system so bills were issued to him rather than Ms X. The Council had flagged the need to change the billing address but explained changes to individual accounts were on hold while it migrated to a new invoicing system.
29. In recognition of the failings in its service the Council offered to pay Ms X £200. The Council also said it has spoken to the officers involved and reminded them of the need to respond to queries promptly. It had also conducted a review of the staffing arrangements and was seeking to recruit an additional officer. And it had reviewed its practice of recording placements as temporary pending review.
30. Ms X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and asked for her complaint to be considered further. She considered there had been a lack of accountability at a senior level and no consideration of the impact the Council’s failings had had on her. In addition the Council had not offered any assurance there would be no reoccurrence of the issues.
31. The Council considered it had addressed Ms X’s main points and said it would not investigate further. It reiterated that both the individuals who had not responded in a timely manner and the officer whose processing errors had led to the billing delays had been spoke to directly. The Council said it had also completed a restructure which would increase the number of financial assessment officers. This would improve the Council’s response to similar queries in the future.
32. Ms X remains dissatisfied and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate her concerns. Ms X says her interactions with the Council have been distressing, frustrating, inefficient and time consuming. And have affected her health and wellbeing. Ms X says that at one point an officer suggested she would be liable for the debt and recovery action could involve bailiffs visiting her home and court proceedings. This caused her great distress and led to panic attacks.
33. Ms X also says the Council’s delay in confirming Mr Y’s placement was permanent meant they were not able to rent out the flat he had lived in for a number of months. This meant they were paying service charges for his flat of around £3,000 as well as care home charges and could not offset some of the costs by privately renting the flat. Ms X would like the Council to offset the service charge against Mr Y’s outstanding care charges.
34. In response to my enquiries the Council says the initial financial assessment was completed on 21 June 2023, 10 days after Mr Y moved to the care home. Mr X was then charged at a respite rate for four weeks.
35. The Council’s records show the social work team agreed Mr X’s placement at the care home as a long term placement on 17 May 2023. However, the placement was wrongly recorded as a short term placement, and until this was corrected on its system, the Council could not issue any invoices for Mr Y’s contributions. The Council says it is unclear why the services were only recorded for four weeks. This error was identified in December 2023. But not corrected until February 2024.
36. The Council notes its response to Ms X’s complaint acknowledges two fundamental failures and has reiterated its offer to pay Ms X £200 in recognition of these.
37. It has also noted that its response to Ms X’s complaint did not address her concerns about the ongoing issues or a reoccurrence of the problem. The Council says it has taken preventative actions to mitigate further incidents of this nature.
38. It says a new structure can into effect in May 2024, but not all vacancies could be filled. However, the two vacant financial assessment officer positions have recently been filled. In addition the Council introduced a new finance system from 1 April 2024. It says this compounded some issues and led to some delays in billing and taking payments. The Council has written to affected residents explaining the issues. However it wrongly wrote to Mr Y rather than Ms X.

Analysis

39. The Council’s delays and errors in assessing and billing Mr Y for his contribution towards the cost of his care are fault.
40. Mr Y moved to the care home in June 2023, but the Council did not complete a financial assessment until December 2023. The Council refers to an initial financial assessment in June 2023 but the documentation shows the Council did not complete a financial assessment at that stage. It instead charged Mr X a flat weekly rate for his care, but only for a four week period.
41. Having completed a financial assessment in December 2023 the Council did not then issue an invoice until March 2024. At which point it requested a significant sum for almost nine months of backdated care contributions.
42. It is clear from the documentation available that the Council missed several opportunities to correct its errors and reduce the delay. Miss X had repeatedly asked the Council for details of Mr Y’s charges and invoices but the Council only appears to have responded to her queries when she made a formal complaint.
43. It is disappointing that despite Ms X repeatedly telling the Council Mr Y had been a resident at the care home since June 2023 the Council did not correct its records. Even though the Council’s records show it established in December 2023 that it had wrongly recorded Mr Y’s stay in the care home as short term, it did not take immediate action to correct this.
44. The Council then added to the confusion in January 2024 when in response to Ms X’s request for clarity it advised that if Mr Y moved to a care home his assessed contribution would be £130.55. This was clearly incorrect and suggests the Council had not properly reviewed Mr Y’s case or Ms X’s queries.
45. The Council accepts there were failures in its service and has apologised to Ms X and offered to pay her £200. While this is to be welcomed, I consider a higher payment would be appropriate to recognise the injustice Ms X has experienced.
46. It is clear from Ms X’s correspondence with the Council that this matter has caused her significant distress, worry and frustration. The Council’s delays meant it was difficult for Ms X to manage Mr Y’s finances or to plan for his expenses. The delays also meant she received a substantial bill which Mr Y did not have the funds to pay.
47. I have not received a record of any conversations where Ms X was told by Council officers that she was liable for the debt and the Council may begin court action or that bailiffs could visit her home. But this was clearly a significant concern for Ms X as the conversation is referenced in a number of her emails, as is the impact it has had on her wellbeing.
48. Ms X has also been put to significant unnecessary time and trouble in trying to resolve this matter.
49. Taking all of this into account, I consider a symbolic payment of £500 would be appropriate to recognise the injustice caused to Ms X.
50. Ms X would also like the Council to offset the cost of the service charge on Mr Y’s home against his outstanding care costs. I am not persuaded this is appropriate in this instance. Notwithstanding the Council’s error in recording Mr X’s placement as short term, that documentation suggests Mr Y’s move to the care home was intended to be long term from the outset. The family would have been involved in the arrangements to move to the care home and the reviews of Mr Y’s care and support needs.

Back to top

Agreed action

51. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and pay her £500 in recognition of the distress, worry and frustration she experienced as a result of the Council’s errors and delays.
52. The Council should take this action within one month of the final decision on this complaint and provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

53. The Council’s delays and errors in assessing and billing Mr Y for his contribution towards the cost of his care are fault. These faults have caused Ms X an injustice.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman