Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about charges for his father’s care. The Council has apologised for their billing errors. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council made billing errors for his father’s, Mr Y’s care costs. Mr X stated that receiving incorrect bills caused panic and distress to him and Mr Y. Mr X would like compensation for the stress via a credit-note being reapplied to Mr Y’s account.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

2. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
3. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr Y receives care services to provide him support within his home. He pays the Council for these services.
5. The Council conducted a financial re-assessment for Mr Y in September 2024 and identified that he received an additional benefit from April 2024. This resulted in an increase to Mr Y’s weekly contribution towards his care package. The Council issued a bill to Mr Y in October 2024 to cover the backdated additional charges from April to September 2024.
6. In January 2025 the Council created an incorrect credit note and applied it to Mr Y’s account. The credit note covered the backdated charges on the account.
7. The Council cancelled the credit note once it had identified the error. In February 2025 it raised a new invoice for the outstanding charges.
8. Mr X contacted the Council about the charges on Mr Y’s account in February 2025, before raising a formal complaint.
9. In their complaint response, the Council apologised for issuing the incorrect credit note and for the unnecessary confusion caused. It also apologised for delays in returning Mr X’s telephone calls regarding the matter.
10. After he had received the Council’s final complaint response, Mr X asked if the Council could set up a payment plan for the outstanding amount on his father’s account. The Council contacted Mr X and advised him that a payment plan could be arranged.
11. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has apologised for issuing the incorrect credit note, and for the resulting confusion for Mr Y and Mr X. That apology remedies any injustice caused. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has apologised for the billing errors and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman