Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about charges for her relative, Ms Y’s care. There is insufficient evidence of fault and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about charges for her relative, Ms Y’s, home care and that the Council has charged for the first six weeks of Ms Y’s residential care, despite it telling her the first six weeks would be free. She says this has caused distress and financial hardship. She wants the Council to apologise and cancel the charges.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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, or
• 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

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X complains the Council incorrectly charged Ms Y for home care after she had been admitted to hospital. In its correspondence with Ms X, the Council explained that Ms Y was responsible for contributing to the first part of her care each week, and then the Council paid the rest.
6. Ms Y received a morning care visit of the day of her hospital admission and the Council charged Ms Y for this. As this was the first day of a new charging week, this charge appears correct. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
7. Ms X says the Council told her that Ms Y would not have to pay for the first six weeks of her residential care, but has since charged for this. In its complaint response, the Council said it records showed that during Ms Y’s discharge planning, Ms Y had asked to move into residential care, so the placement was deemed to be long term. This meant that the placement did not fall under the Discharge to Assess scheme, where up to six weeks care can be provided free of charge.
8. We will not investigate this. As this was a verbal conversation, an investigation into this would be unlikely to reach a finding as there is unlikely to be any evidence of what was or was not said. Long term care placements do not fall under the Discharge to Assess scheme, so there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to charge Ms Y.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman