Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her mother’s care. We find the Council at fault for failing to correctly record Mrs B’s hospital admission as a permanent planned change. This means Mrs B was incorrectly charged for care. The Council has agreed to recalculate Mrs B’s care charges and issue a revised invoice to Mrs B’s estate.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her mother, Mrs B’s, care. This includes incorrect financial charges, mishandling of private belongings, failure to complete necessary records and failure to provide the correct support while Mrs B was in care at Old Alresford Cottage. Miss X says this has resulted in financial loss. Miss X would like the Council to improve how it provides case oversight and financial support for people in care where family are not involved.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the NHS. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)
5. 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)

6. 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(1), as amended)
7. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have not investigated the care Mrs B received at home between January 2022 and August 2022. This support was privately commissioned by Mrs B and there is no evidence Mrs B did not have capacity to arrange and secure the provision she felt she needed. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of fault on behalf of the Council to justify an investigation.
9. I have not investigated Mrs B’s care after her admission to hospital in May 2023. From this date, Mrs B’s care was arranged and funded by the NHS. We cannot investigate actions of the NHS or Integrated Care Boards. Miss X has been signposted to the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman for these parts of her complaint.
10. Miss X’s complaint relates to Mrs B’s care between January 2022 and September 2023. Although the events took place over 12 months ago, Miss X was not aware of the events until January 2024. Miss X complained to us in July 2024, therefore I consider Miss X’s complaint is in time.
11. I have investigated the Council’s actions in assessing Mrs B’s care needs and her move into a residential care home in August 2022. I have investigated the Council’s actions in supporting Mrs B in moving her belongings into the residential care home and the transfer of Mrs B’s belongings to a new care home in September 2023.
12. I have also investigated Miss X’s complaint that charges incurred by Mrs B for personal items during her stay at the care home were unnecessary, and that Mrs B was incorrectly charged for care following her hospital admission in May 2023.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

13. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
14. Miss X and the Council have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

Care assessment

15. Sections 9 and 10 of the Care Act 2014 require councils to carry out an assessment for any adult with an appearance of need for care and support. They must provide an assessment to everyone regardless of their finances or whether the council thinks the person has eligible needs. The assessment must be of the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must also involve the individual and, where suitable, their carer or any other person they might want involved.
16. Councils must carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Councils should tell people when their assessment will take place and keep them informed throughout the assessment.

Charging

17. The Care Act 2014 (section 14 and 17) provides a legal framework for charging for care and support. It enables a council to decide whether to charge a person when it is arranging to meet their care and support needs, or a carer’s support needs. The charging rules for residential care are set out in the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and councils should have regard to the Care and Support Statutory Guidance.
18. When the Council arranges a care home placement, it must follow the regulations when undertaking a financial assessment to decide how much a person must pay towards the cost of their residential care.
19. The law and guidance do not specify a timescale for completing a financial assessment, however, in most circumstances we expect the Council to complete financial assessments before any care services begin. Under section 19(3) of the Care Act 2014, Council’s can meet needs that appear to be urgent without completing a needs assessment or financial assessment.

Protection of property

20. Section 47 of the Care Act 2014 sets out a duty for Councils to take reasonable steps to prevent or mitigate loss of damage to a person’s belongings when the person is unable to do so themselves. As part of this duty, the Council may deal with any of the adult’s movable property in a way which is reasonably necessary for preventing or mitigating loss or damage.

Independent advocacy and support

21. Section 67 of the Care Act 2014 sets out a Councils duty to arrange for an independent advocate. The Council must arrange for an independent advocate if it considers that the service user would have substantial difficulty with the following, if an advocate were not available –
1. Understanding relevant information;
2. Retaining that information;
3. Using or weighing that information as part of the process of being involved;
4. Communicating the individual’s views, wishes or feelings (whether by talking, using sign language or any other means).

Background

22. Mrs B has two daughters, neither of which were involved in her care during the period which has been investigated.
23. Mrs B passed away towards the end of 2023.

What happened

24. The following is a summary of key events. It is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
25. In May 2022 Mrs B’s care support worker contacted the Council as Mrs B had expressed that she would like to explore the possibility of moving into extra-care housing. The Council contacted Mrs B and she consented to be placed on the waiting list for a care assessment.
26. In June 2022 Mrs B’s mental health declined. The Council took steps to ensure Mrs B was aware of her support options. Mrs B continued to receive support from her carers and the Older Peoples Mental Health team (OPMH).
27. The Council visited Mrs B at the beginning of July 2022 to complete an assessment to determine whether Mrs B would be eligible for extra-care housing.
28. During the assessment Mrs B was supported by her care worker. The assessment was completed, and the Council acted the same day to request a mental health assessment and joint visit from OPMH. Council records show Mrs B’s mental capacity was considered and no concerns were raised about her ability to engage in the assessment.
29. A joint visit with the Council, OPMH, Mrs B and her support worker took place two weeks later. During this visit Mrs B was uncertain if she wanted to move so the option of a day centre was discussed. The Council agreed to complete a new assessment for the day centre and the OPMH Team agreed to support Mrs B’s mental health.
30. The Council completed the assessment of Mrs B’s needs at the end of July 2022. The assessment did not raise any concerns with Mrs B’s capacity to make her own decisions on what type of care she would like to receive.
31. At the beginning of August 2022, the Council completed another visit to Mrs B to discuss her options. The OPMH team and Mrs B’s care support worker were also present during the home visit. During this visit Mrs B expressed she would like to be more supported with personal care. The Council explained it could look at providing a package of care for Mrs B to remain in her home, or it could explore the possibility of residential care.
32. The following day the Council agreed funding for Mrs B to have a two week respite stay at Old Alresford Cottage, a residential care home. This would allow Mrs B to experience the care home before making a permanent decision about her care.
33. Mrs B initially refused the offer of a short term respite stay so the Council planned to secure a package of care to support Mrs B in the home. Mrs B contacted the Council the following week to request the respite stay.
34. The Council arranged for Mrs B’s two week respite stay to go ahead. The Council contacted Mrs B’s care support workers and asked them to help Mrs B with packing for the stay. The Council supported Mrs B’s move to the residential placement. This included ensuring Mrs B’s house was clean and tidy, ensuring Mrs B was packed and ready and taking her to the placement.
35. The Council received an update from the care home at the beginning of September. Mrs B had been admitted to hospital but had expressed her wish to return permanently to the care home. The care home confirmed it was happy to accept Mrs B as a permanent resident when she was medically fit to be discharged from the hospital.
36. The care home also informed the Council Mrs B had experienced falls during her time at the care home. These were correctly reported and investigated by the care home and Council.
37. The council visited Mrs B at the care home in October 2022. During this visit Mrs B said she would like to become a permanent resident at the care home. Council records show this decision was discussed in full with Mrs B and she had capacity to consent and understand her decision.
38. Between Mrs B, the Council and the care home it was agreed that a member of the care home staff would support Mrs B with collecting her remaining belongings from her flat and the closure process for the flat.
39. During Mrs B’s time living at the care home, she was invoiced for additional items and services. This included items such as newspapers, bedroom items, chocolate, incontinence pads and services such as hairdressing. There is no evidence to suggest Mrs B did not have capacity to manage her own finances and make decisions on these purchases. Evidence provided by Miss X explains that although the care provider offered incontinence pads, Mrs B preferred a specific brand of incontinence pad and she funded these with her own finances. Mrs B was able to make her own decisions to spend her money as she pleased during this time. There is no evidence to suggest these charges were unfair or unnecessary.
40. The Council completed a safeguarding visit to Mrs B in December 2022. During this visit Mrs B explained she was anxious about her finances and the upcoming financial assessment. Mrs B was aware she needed to contribute to her care fees but felt she was struggling to manage her finances. The Council agreed to explore support options for Mrs B.
41. During Mrs B’s stay at the care home it was agreed that staff would support her with making card payments when she was unable to leave her room to pay her care fees. On occasions where staff supported Mrs B with making the card payments the invoices correctly state Mrs B was not present at the time of payment. There is no evidence to suggest Mrs B was subject to incorrect charges when she was supported in making these payments.
42. The Council completed an assessment of Mrs B’s finances in January 2023.
43. In February 2023 Mrs B was added to the Council’s waiting list for an assessment to determine whether she required support with managing her finances. The Council did not complete this assessment due to Mrs B being admitted to hospital in May 2023.
44. Two days after Mrs B’s hospital admission the care provider told the Council it was no longer a suitable setting for Mrs B.
45. Following Mrs B’s hospital admission, the NHS and Integrated Care Board (ICB) took over her care. The Council wrote to the ICB in June 2023 to explain Mrs B’s belongings needed collecting from the care home.
46. In response to our enquiries the Council told us it believed the ICB was the correct service to manage the removal of Mrs B’s belongings as it was now the lead agency in providing her care. The ICB did not respond to the Council’s request.
47. At the beginning of August 2023, the Council contacted the care provider to discuss Mrs B’s belongings. The care provider and Council agreed the Council would take steps to discuss the removal of Mrs B’s belongings with her family.
48. The Council contacted one of Mrs B’s daughters the following week. The daughter explained she could not collect Mrs B’s belongings but explained which items she believed Mrs B would want to keep. The Council advised it would discuss whether the care provider could store these items and consider donating or disposing of the other items.
49. The care home stored the smaller items which Mrs B’s daughter had said she would want to keep. These items were transferred by care home staff to Mrs B’s new placement at the end of September 2023.
50. As part of the agreement for the care home staff to transport Mrs B’s belongings to her new placement, Mrs B’s daughter told the manager to use £60 from Mrs B’s cash tin to cover the cost of transporting the items. In response to our enquiries the Council and care provider were unable to confirm whether the £60 was taken by the manager or returned to Mrs B.
51. Mrs B was charged for her room at the care home until the middle of August 2023.
52. From April 2023 Mrs B stopped paying her care charge invoices. This resulted in an arrears balance. In response to our enquiries the Council told us it had continued to issue invoices to Mrs B directly as it had no alternative financial representative on file.
53. From January 2024 the Council issued the invoices to Mrs B’s daughter, who was noted as Mrs B’s next of kin. These invoices remain unpaid due to a dispute over the outstanding balance.
54. In response to our enquiries the Council told us there was fault in the way Mrs B was charged for her care following her hospital admission in May 2023. The Council told us Mrs B’s hospital admission and notification from the care home that it was no longer a suitable setting should have been recorded as a permanent planned change in accordance with its contract for services. This means the care home should have been provided with four weeks’ notice to terminate Mrs B’s residency agreement from May 2023.

My findings

55. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions in supporting Mrs B between July 2022 and September 2022. Mrs B was actively involved in deciding how she wished to receive her care and she was sufficiently supported by professionals. Council records show Mrs B’s mental capacity was considered during the care assessment and no professionals raised concerns around Mrs B’s ability to make decisions or engage with the assessments. Mrs B’s hesitation to commit to residential care is not clear evidence she had substantial difficulty engaging in the process. There is no evidence to suggest Mrs B required an independent advocate to support her access to the care process.
56. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s support of Mrs B becoming a permanent resident at the care home. The Council ensured Mrs B was correctly assessed within a reasonable timeframe and in line with Care and Support Statutory Guidance. Mrs B was aware of the implications of becoming a permanent resident. Council records show it considered Mrs B’s mental capacity throughout her care assessment, and no concerns were raised about her ability to engage in the process or make decisions about her care needs. Mrs B consented to the care home staff supporting her with moving her belongings and handing back the keys to the flat.
57. There is no evidence of fault in the actions taken by the Council to take reasonable steps to prevent loss or damage to Mrs B’s personal belongings following her admission to hospital in May 2023. Council records show it took reasonable steps to discuss the removal of Mrs B’s belongings with her family, the care home and the ICB.
58. The care providers actions in taking card payments for Mrs B’s care fees when she was not present placed the parties involved at unnecessary risk. This is fault. I do not consider this fault caused Mrs B an injustice as she consented to the agreement and there is no evidence to suggest she was charged incorrectly.
59. There was a delay in the Council completing an assessment to determine whether Mrs B was eligible for support in managing her finances. This is fault. Mrs B first asked for support in December 2022, and the Council had not completed an assessment by May 2023, despite her care charges being in arrears. We cannot determine what the outcome of the assessment would have been had it been completed in a reasonable timeframe. The delay therefore caused uncertainty for Mrs B. In line with our guidance on remedies I have not recommended a personal remedy for this injustice as Mrs B has since passed away.
60. There was a delay in the Council completing Mrs B’s financial assessment. Mrs B became a permanent resident at Old Alresford Cottage in October 2022, and the Council did not complete a financial assessment until January 2023. The delay is fault however I do not consider the delay caused Mrs B substantial injustice. Council records show it reacted promptly to Mrs B’s request to become a permanent resident at Old Alresford Cottage following a short term respite stay. The Council ensured Mrs B was aware of the financial impact of becoming a permanent resident and there is no evidence to suggest the delay resulted in incorrect charges.
61. In response to our enquiries the Council was unable to confirm whether the care home manager took £60 from Mrs B’s cash tin to cover the cost of transferring Mrs B’s items to her new placement. It is agreed that Mrs B’s daughter gave permission for the cash to be used for this purpose. The care provider’s failure to document what happened with the cash is fault but it is evident there was an agreement it could be used to cover the cost of transporting Mrs B’s belongings, so I do not consider the fault caused Mrs B significant injustice.
62. There is no evidence of fault in the Council pursuing Mrs B’s next of kin for the outstanding care charges between January 2024 and September 2025.
63. From September 2025 the Council was aware of the fault in calculating Mrs B’s care charges and failed to recalculate the amount owed. This is fault which caused Miss X distress and frustration.
64. The Council failed to correctly record Mrs B’s hospital admission as a permanent planned change. This is fault which resulted in Mrs B being charged additional care fees. The Council has recognised this fault and agreed to remove £2,649.15 from Mrs B’s outstanding balance. The Council has not explained how it reached this figure.

Back to top

Action

65. Within one month of the final decision the Council will:
• Apologise to Miss X for failing to recalculate the outstanding amount once it realised the charging error in September 2025. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making its apology.
• Recalculate Mrs B’s outstanding care charges to ensure there is no charge for the residential care home after 16 June 2023. This date is four weeks after the care provider confirmed it could no longer meet Mrs B’s care needs. The Council should issue a new invoice to be settled by Mrs B’s estate.
66. Within three months of the final decision the Council will provide written advice to all care providers in its area to remind them of best practice and minimising the risks to residents and staff when supporting residents with managing their personal finances.
67. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

68. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman