Summary: We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint about a lack of advice about the costs of adult social care. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mrs X to remedy the uncertainty caused. It will also remind relevant staff about the importance of providing appropriate information about charging for adult social care.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to give advice about charging for adult social care when it assessed her relative’s care needs in May 2021, nor when he went into a care home in July 2022. She said the family were not aware until September 2023 that they could ask for Council support with care costs when Mr Y’s capital fell below £23,250. The Council supported Mr Y from 29 September 2023, the date on which the family asked for a financial assessment, but Mr Y’s capital had fallen to around £11,000 by that point. Mrs X said Mr Y has paid significantly more towards his care than he should have done, and she wants a refund of at least £15,500.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. 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)
5. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

8. The Council made a home visit to assess Mr Y’s care needs in May 2021. At that point, Mr and Mrs Y were living with their son, Mr X and his wife, Mrs X. The assessment records:
• Mr and Mrs Y were living with their son, Mr X and his wife, following Mrs Y’s stroke, and Mr and Mrs Y planned to sell their former home;
• Mr Y had significant care needs. Mrs X was his main carer and Mrs Y was supporting him with some personal care tasks. Mrs X indicated she was happy to continue to care for Mr Y;
• Mr Y tended to wander, and the social worker discussed door sensors to prevent this. There was also a discussion about Mr Y attending a day centre, which could be arranged by the Council or the family could do this privately;
• Mrs X “advised that if circumstances were to change.
9. Following the visit, there were a number of telephone calls between the social worker and Mrs X. Council records state:
• the social worker “explained [the] day centre was a costed service requiring a financial assessment” and “explained threshold”. Mrs X said Mrs Y managed Mr Y’s finances and would need to make any financial decisions;
• the social worker advised Mrs X either the Council could carry out a financial assessment and arrange a day centre or the family could arrange a day centre privately. The record states Mrs X said the family would “go private”;
• the social worker would send “leaflets and information by post”, including about day centres, door sensors and “useful contacts re blue badge and benefits”. This was followed by a letter to Mrs X enclosing “various Leaflets”.
10. Mrs X told the Council she had contacted it in July 2022, after Mr Y moved to a care home, but was not advised about the capital limit or given information about charging for adult social care. The Council said it had no record of a contact then but apologised “if contact had been made and not progressed”.
11. Mrs X asked for a financial assessment in September 2023, after being advised to do so by Mr Y’s care home because his capital was depleted, and the family were worried about how to manage ongoing care home fees.
12. In October 2023, Mrs X spoke to a manager about why she had not been advised about the capital limits and Council support for adult social care costs earlier. The Council’s record for that conversation says the manager that if Mr Y had overpaid “they will receive a refund from the care provider”.
13. The Council completed a financial assessment and advised Mrs X of the outcome in late November 2023. By this point Mr Y’s capital had fallen to around £11,000. The Council said it would support Mr Y with his care home fees from late September 2023, when the request for a financial assessment was made. Mr X was still required to pay an assessed contribution from his income towards the cost of his care but the Council asked the care home to refund any overpayment from 29 September to the date of its funding decision.
14. The Council later confirmed it could not back-date the funding further because it had no notice of Mr Y’s change of circumstances until September 2023.

My assessment

15. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events complained about or within 12 months of becoming aware of the issue but can consider investigating late complaints if there are good reasons to do so.
16. Mrs X was aware of the problem with the Council’s advice about adult social care charging in September 2023. In a telephone conversation in October 2023, the Council indicated that it would refund any overpayment. Its financial position on this communicated to Mrs X in February 2024 and Mrs X complained to us in January 2025. She explained that due to caring responsibilities for other family members she was not able to do so earlier. In the circumstances, I have decided there were good reasons for the delay and for us to consider this complaint.
17. I note the Council did advise Mrs X she could contact it again if circumstances changed and it has no record of any further contact until September 2023. Despite this, in my view, if we investigated further it is likely we would find fault with the Council for not keeping proper records of the advice given about charging for adult social care in May 2021, for not demonstrating that it had provided charging information in writing to the family and for potentially misleading Mrs X about the likely position in its telephone call with her in October 2023.
18. Given the lapse of time and the poor record-keeping, I cannot say, even on balance, whether the Council gave appropriate charging information. Therefore, the injustice caused to Mr Y and his family is limited to the uncertainty about whether the outcome would have been different but for the likely failings and the frustration caused by raising Mrs X’s expectations about the Council’s position in October 2023. Even if we could make that finding, our approach is to recommend a symbolic payment for poor advice, and we would not be able to recommend the Council pay the family the sums Mrs X is seeking.
19. We therefore asked the Council to take steps to remedy the injustice caused and it has agreed to take the following steps within one month of the date of this decision:
• apologise to Mrs X in line with our guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice;
• make a symbolic payment to Mrs X of £250 to reflect the uncertainty and frustration caused; and
• remind relevant staff of the importance of providing advice about adult social care charging when assessing needs so families can make an informed choice about care and support, to ensure the advice given is properly recorded and to provide written advice about charging for adult social care, for example, by providing a leaflet or link to the information on its website.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We have upheld this complaint about a lack of advice about charging for adult social care. The Council has agreed to take appropriate steps to remedy the injustice caused and prevent recurrence of the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman