Summary: The Council was at fault for the delay in completing Mr Y’s financial assessment, but its remedy was appropriate. I found no fault in the care assessment or care planning, so there is no further role for this office.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to act properly in arranging care for her grandfather, Mr Y. She says the Council failed to provide Mr Y with information about potential care charges prior to the service beginning.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I have:

• considered the complaint and information provided by Miss X;
• considered correspondence between Miss X and the Council, including the Council’s final response to the complaint;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the responses;
• taken account of relevant legislation;
• offered Miss X and the Council an opportunity to comment on a draft of this document, and considered the comments made.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation

5. 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.
6. The Care Act 2014 gives councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan which must be ‘person-centred’. The 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 the person and any relevant people, such as the carer(s) the adult has.
7. Where a council has decided to charge for care, it must carry out a financial assessment to decide what a person can afford to pay. It must then give the person a written record of the completed assessment. A council must not charge more than the cost it incurs to meet a person’s assessed eligible needs.
8. People receiving care and support other than in a care home need to keep a certain level of income to cover their living costs. Councils’ financial assessments can take a person’s income and capital into consideration, but not the value of their home. After charging, a person’s income must not reduce below a weekly amount known as the minimum income guarantee (MIG). This is set by national government and reviewed each year.

Key facts

9. Mr Y is in his eighties and lives at home with his wife. He has dementia and other health conditions.
10. In early February 2025, the Council completed a Care Act assessment of Mr Y’s needs. I have seen a copy of the completed assessment, which records that Mr Y, his wife and their daughter were present. The assessor recorded that Mr Y consented to the assessment and was able to communicate his wishes and needs without difficulty. The assessment also records that he understood his need for support and that there were no concerns about his mental capacity.
11. The assessment concluded that Mr Y had eligible care needs. The Council subsequently allocated funding for 5.25 hours of care each week, delivered across seven days. The assessment also identified a need for day centre provision. The assessor recorded that Mr Y and his family had been provided with a copy of the Council’s charging notification letter. It also recorded that Mr Y would require support from his family to complete a financial assessment and that the Council’s financial assessment team would determine any charges arising from that assessment.
12. The Council completed a Care and support plan on 24 February 2025.
13. Miss X says Mr Y’s care needs were adequately met by support from his family and that formal care services were unnecessary. She says the assessing officer used leading questions, which influenced Mr Y’s responses and resulted in a care package being put in place that Mr Y had neither requested nor consented to. She says this meant Mr Y was not given a proper opportunity to make an informed choice about his care.
14. Miss X also says charges were subsequently applied for a service Mr Y did not need. She considers this caused him to incur unnecessary financial costs and resulted in stress and distress.
15. The Council’s records show that the financial assessment was completed on 31 July 2025 and that Mr Y was notified of the charges on 4 August 2025.
16. Miss X submitted a formal complaint to the Council on 9 August 2025.
17. The Council responded to the Complaint on 18 September 2025. It partially upheld the complaint because of the delay in completing Mr Y’s financial assessment. It apologised and acknowledged that the assessment took significantly longer than expected and should normally be completed within 12 weeks. It found no fault in the completion of Mr Y’s needs assessment and concluded Mr Y freely accepted care services.
18. As a remedy, the Council agreed to waive the charges for the first 12 weeks of care and only charge from the 13th week onwards, reducing Mr Y’s total invoice to £774.43. It also recommended that the financial assessment team review its processes to reduce waiting times and prevent similar delays in future.
19. Miss X is dissatisfied with the response. She says that dealing with the matter has required significant time and effort and has undermined the family’s confidence in engaging with social services in the future.

Analysis

20. On the evidence available, I have found no fault in the way the Council completed its assessment of Mr Y’s care and support needs. The assessment records that Mr Y, his wife and daughter were present and that Mr Y consented to the assessment. It also records that he was able to communicate his wishes and needs, understood his need for support and that there were no concerns about his mental capacity.
21. Where there is no evidence of fault in the process by which a professional decision is reached, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the merits of that decision or its outcome. Miss X disagrees with the outcome of the assessment and considers Mr Y’s needs could have been met by family support. However, her disagreement alone does not mean the assessment outcome was wrong.
22. I have also considered Miss X’s concern that the assessor used leading questions and that Mr Y did not request or consent to the care package. The contemporaneous assessment records Mr Y’s participation and consent and does not indicate any concerns about his ability to express his wishes or understand the assessment. On the evidence available, I do not find that the Council imposed a care package without Mr Y’s consent or otherwise failed to properly consider his views.
23. The Council acknowledged fault in relation to the time taken to complete Mr Y’s financial assessment. It accepted that this took significantly longer than expected and that financial assessments should normally be completed within 12 weeks.
24. The Council’s remedy was appropriate. It waived the charges for the first 12 weeks of care and only charged from week thirteen, reducing Mr Y’s invoice to £774.43. It also recommended its financial assessment team review its processes to reduce waiting times.
25. Overall, there was no fault in the completion of the assessment or care planning, and the Council’s actions were appropriate to remedy the injustice caused by the delay in the financial assessment. On that basis, there is no further role for this office.

Back to top

Final Decision

26. The Council was at fault for the delay in completing the financial assessment, but its remedy was appropriate. I found no fault in the care assessment or care planning, so there is no further role for this office.
27. It is on this basis; the complaint will be closed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman