Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with Mr X’s care costs. This is because we would not achieve a worthwhile outcome if we were to investigate.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has sent an incorrect bill for care costs when the care has been paid for privately. He also complains the Council had not assessed his care needs as requested.
2. Mr X says the Council has caused distress and would like the Council to agree to make direct payments for his care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s care needs were arranged and paid for privately from 2024. In 2025, he applied to the Council for direct payments.
7. The Council considered the request and declined to make the direct payments for Mr X’s care. However, it agreed to pay his care costs directly to the care provider, including payments already made.
8. The Council made a payment to the care provider for it to reimburse the charges for Mr X’s care since 2024. The care provider repaid those funds to Mr X.
9. The Council’s financial assessment concluded Mr X should make a contribution toward his care costs. It sent a bill for this to Mr X.
10. Mr X complained the contribution did not take account of periods when he had not received care as he had been in hospital.
11. The Council sought details of Mr X’s hospital stays from his social worker and once it had this, it reduced the bill accordingly.
12. The Council has made a decision it is entitled to make about direct payments. We would not seek to reverse this decision here.
13. It has also considered the concerns about Mr X’s contribution bill and made an appropriate adjustment. If we were to investigate how the bill was initially sent and why, it is unlikely we would achieve anything beyond what the Council has already done even if we found fault.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman