Summary: There has been fault by the Council. It did not clearly communicate, in writing, the financial contribution that Mr D should make when his property value was disregarded for the first 12 weeks he was in residential care. An apology and review of procedures remedies the injustice, as the charges made by the Council were correct.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains for her father, Mr D.
2. Mrs X said they were not told that her father would need to make a financial contribution towards care fees when the value of his property was disregarded for the first 12 weeks. Mrs X has also complained the Council has not explained how the charges for the 12 weeks were calculated. Mrs X says that being given the wrong information has been stressful and they are not sure if the invoices are correct.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mrs 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

7. 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.
8. 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.
9. The financial limit, known as the ‘upper capital limit’, exists for the purposes of the financial assessment. This sets out at what point a person can get council support to meet their eligible needs. People who have over the upper capital limit must pay the full cost of their residential care home fees. Once their capital has reduced to less than the upper capital limit, they only have to pay an assessed contribution towards their fees. Where a person’s resources are below the lower capital limit they will not need to contribute to the cost of their care and support from their capital.
10. The Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 say that ‘where the adult is a permanent resident and there is an unexpected change in their financial circumstances the local authority may disregard the value of the adult’s main or only home which the adult would normally otherwise occupy for a period of 12 weeks’.

My analysis

11. Mr D went into a residential care home, after a period of carers visiting him at home. Mr D owns his own home and was told by the Council that he would need to self fund his care due to the value of the property. Mrs X said they were told on the telephone there would be a 12 week property disregard and so there would be no charge for the first 12 weeks residential care.
12. The Council then invoiced Mr D for £208 per week during the 12 week period. The Council carried out a financial assessment on 17 April 2025 that calculated Mr D’s contribution towards care costs for those 12 weeks. This assessment included Mr X’s income but not the value of his property, which was disregarded.
13. I can find no evidence the Council has wrongly charged Mr D. The 12 week period disregards the value of Mr D’s property, it does not mean that there is no charge made. The Council carried out a financial assessment, which did not include the value of Mr D’s property and invoiced the family according to this calculation.
14. Mrs X raises two complaints. First, that she was incorrectly told that care would be free in the 12 week period. There is no evidence to confirm this either way, as I understand it was during a telephone conversation. The Council has sent copies of leaflets that would be routinely sent to service users on paying for care and the 12 week property disregard. Both of these documents explain there would still be a financial assessment of income during the 12 week property disregard and so there may be a charge.
15. Mrs X signed a deferred payment agreement on 29 May 2025 which clearly stated that ‘she confirmed that a financial assessment has been carried out by the Council and understand that Mr D is responsible for the payment of the weekly client contribution they have been assessed as being able to pay from their income and other capital’.
16. It is possible Mrs X may have been mistakenly told that the care was free for the 12 week period. It is also possible Mrs X was told about the financial contribution and misunderstood what was said to her. There is no way for me to tell what was said in a private conversation.
17. There is evidence that Mrs X was given leaflets with the correct information on and signed an agreement on 29 May 2025 to say that she understood there may be an income related charge.
18. Mrs X also complains that she was told on 17 April 2025 that the weekly charge would be £112 or £109 per week. So, she feels the £208 charge has not been explained. The letters of 17 April 2025 explain that the £112 and £109 charges are the financial contribution towards non-residential care. The £208 per week is the assessed contribution towards residential care, which is a different calculation and gives a different amount.
19. The Council has sent me a copy of a financial assessment dated 17 April 2025. But, I have not seen any evidence that a letter explaining the £208 weekly financial contribution was sent to Mrs X or Mr D. So, when Mr D went into residential care the cost for the 12 week disregard period had not been clearly explained to them. Mrs X said they were told this period was free and while they had received some leaflets, it was not until they received the invoices they were made aware there would be a £208 a week charge.
20. The Council has charged Mr D correctly. But, unless the Council has evidence to the contrary, it did not communicate the charges to the family, in writing, before the start of the placement. This was fault.
21. I now have to consider what injustice the poor communication has caused to Mrs X and Mr D. I do not consider it has caused them a financial injustice. If the family had been aware of the charges, Mr D would still have moved into residential care. As Mr D has used the care services, I do not consider the Council should waive the £208 charge per week.
22. However, I do understand that poor communication has caused the situation to be more stressful than it would have been. In order to remedy that injustice the Council should apologise to Mrs X and Mr D, and review its procedures to ensure that families are given timely and correct information in writing when a 12 week property disregard is put in place.

Back to top

Action

23. Within two months of the date of the decision on this complaint the Council should:
• Apologise in writing to Mrs X and Mr D. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Review its procedures to ensure that families are given written information about the financial contribution towards residential care charges when a 12 week property disregard is in place.
24. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman