Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to tell him it had decided to charge him for care before he moved into supported living. We find no fault in how the Council communicated the care charges to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to inform him it had decided to charge him care costs before he moved into supported living.
2. He says the Council’s failings caused him distress, uncertainty and damage to his mental health when he started receiving unexpected bills; and led to him accruing a debt of about £5,000. He wants the Council to cancel the charges, apologise and make service improvements to prevent the same thing happening to others.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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)
5. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have investigated from April 2024, when the Council gave Mr X information that it would arrange a financial assessment to calculate his care charges, until 11 August 2025 when the Council gave Mr X a final response to his complaint.
8. Mr X complained to us on 10 September 2025. This means matters before September 2024 happened more that 12 months before he complained and are therefore late. Mr X had a financial representative until November 2024 and I have seen evidence he did not let the matter rest. I have decided these are good reasons to exercise my discretion to investigate from April 2024.
9. Mr X also raised concerns about recent Council actions that happened after the Council’s final response in August 2025. I have not investigated beyond that date because the law says the Council should usually be given a reasonable opportunity to investigate matters before we do. I have seen no reason to exercise my discretion to investigate those matters in this case.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Assessments, care plans and reviews

12. 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.
13. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). The care and support plan should consider what needs the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area. When preparing a care and support plan the council must involve any carer the adult has. The support plan must include a personal budget, which is the money the council has worked out it will cost to arrange the necessary care and support for that person.
14. Section 27 of the Care Act 2014 says councils should keep care and support plans under review. Government Care and Support Statutory Guidance says councils should review plans at least every 12 months. Councils should consider a light touch review six to eight weeks after agreeing and signing off the plan and personal budget. They should carry out reviews as quickly as is reasonably practicable in a timely manner proportionate to the needs to be met. Councils must also conduct a review if an adult or a person acting on the adult’s behalf makes a reasonable request for one.

Charging for social care services: the power to charge

15. A council has a duty to arrange care and support for those with eligible needs, and a power to meet both eligible and non-eligible needs in places other than care homes. A council can choose to charge for non-residential care following a person’s needs assessment. Where it decides to charge, the council must follow the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and have regard to the Care Act statutory guidance. (Care Act 2014, section 14 and 17)

What happened

16. This is a summary of key events. It is not a complete chronology of everything that happened.
17. Mr X is an adult. He lived at a parent’s home. The parent acted as his financial representative. The Council assessed him and decided he had care and support needs. It provided him a care and support plan.
18. In April 2024 the Council met with Mr X and his parent. Mr X needed support to move into an assisted living facility. The Council gave him and his parent information about the funding of his care and support to do so. It explained the care and support was a chargeable service. It explained it would carry out a financial assessment to decide how much he would be charged. Mr X and his parent signed a document that confirmed they had received the information.
19. In August 2024 the Council had identified a supported living facility run by a care provider. It assessed Mr X should receive some one-to-one care and some background care from staff working at the facility.
20. The Council did a light touch financial assessment to decide how much Mr X would be charged for his care. It sent a letter to Mr X’s parent that explained the charge.
21. A few days later in August, Mr X completed his move into the supported living facility.
22. At the beginning of September the Council recorded it tried to telephone Mr X to ask how his placement was going and book in a review. Mr X did not answer his phone. The Council then telephoned his parent. His parent told the Council Mr X had settled in quickly, but was concerned about charges for his care.
23. In October the Council visited Mr X and carried out a six week review. It recorded Mr X was benefitting from the placement and had no concerns, just that he was not happy with the amount he was paying.
24. In November Mr X’s parent told the Council she would no longer be his financial representative. The Council informed Mr X’s care provider so it could provide him support to manage his own finances.
25. Mr X continued to raised concerns about the amount he was being charged. The Council communicated with Mr X’s care provider about his concerns and how it could support him to manage his finances.
26. Mr X remained concerned he was being charged too much. He sent the Council documents about his charges and benefits In January and February 2025. The Council carried out a financial assessment and said the charges were correct.
27. The Council visited Mr X at the end of June to review his care. Staff that provided some of his care also attended. The Council recorded Mr X said he did not need the level of care he was being charged for, became irate, and left the review.
28. The Council recorded the matter as a complaint. It emailed Mr X and said it would provide a response.
29. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in early August. It said it did not uphold his complaint about the charges.
30. Mr X complained to us in September.

Analysis

31. The Council explained to Mr X that he may have to contribute to his care costs in April 2024, before the chargeable care commenced. Mr X signed a letter confirming he had received the information.
32. On 21 August 2024 the Council completed a financial assessment and sent Mr X’s parent a letter that explained the amount he would be charged for his care. This was before the charges started.
33. I note the Council addressed the letter about Mr X’s charges to his parent, not to him personally. However, the evidence shows Mr X’s parent was his financial representative at that time.
34. For this reason I find no fault in the Council’s decision to send the letter to Mr X’s parent
35. Mr X’s parent first raised Mr X’s concerns about the charges, on his behalf, with the Council in early September. Mr X raised the concerns directly with the Council in October when it reviewed his care.
36. I have decided this shows, on the balance of probabilities, Mr X was aware of the charges when his care commenced.
37. I acknowledge that Mr X continued to raise concerns with the Council about the amount of care he had been assessed as needing, and the charges, throughout the period I investigated. However, he remained in the supported living facility. The Council therefore had the power to charge for the care in line with paragraph 15.
38. I have seen no fault in how the Council assessed, reviewed and communicated his care charges throughout the period I investigated. Because I have seen no fault in how the Council made its decisions, I cannot question the outcome, and do not uphold Mr X’s complaint. This is in line with paragraph 3.

Back to top

Decision

39. I find no fault in how the Council assessed, reviewed and communicated Mr X’s care charges and therefore cannot question the outcome. I have completed my investigation and do not uphold Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman