Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s backdated bill for care charge contributions. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council sent a backdated bill for her contribution to her care fees. She says the Council had not carried out a proper financial assessment or told her she would have to make payments toward her care.
2. Ms X says the Council has caused her to be in significant debt which has caused distress. She is seeking an investigation into why the Council did not carry out a proper assessment and would like the Ombudsman to consider whether the charges should be waived.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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. (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 completed a financial assessment form in 2024. The Council said it told her then that care would be charged for and it would carry out a financial assessment.
6. Following its assessment, the Council told Ms X that based on her income her contribution then was nil. The Council says it also told Ms X that she must report any changes to her finances to the Council.
7. The Council instated care for Ms X in October 2024, and it reconfirmed there was no charge based on its assessment. It also reiterated that any changes must be reported to the Council.
8. The Council confirmed the nil charge for the new financial year in March 2025, again telling Ms X she should let the Council know if there was anything wrong in its assessment at that time as that could affect the amount she needed to pay.
9. Later in 2025, the Council checked the information it held from Ms X’s 2024 financial assessment form, up to date Department of Work and Pensions information and Council Tax.
10. The Council discovered that Ms X’s Universal Credit payments had increased in October 2024. It says Ms X did not report this.
11. On consideration of the changed circumstances, the Council assessed that Ms X should have been paying for her care since October 2024.
12. It limited the charges to March 2025 onward, discounting the charges for the previous financial year. It sent a letter to explain this charge by post.
13. The Council sent a backdated bill to Ms X by email and that bill arrived before the letter of explanation.
14. Ms X complained the bill had come unexpectedly and caused distress as the Council had not carried out a financial assessment involving her and she had not therefore expected the change.
15. The Council recognised the bill should not have arrived before its letter of explanation and apologised for the distress this may have caused. It also confirmed the assessment was not finalised. It said it would put the account on hold to give her time to provide any information she would like included in the Council’s assessment.
16. 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. This has been done.
17. There is no statutory requirement for the Council to include Ms X sooner than it did. It has also given her the opportunity to provide any information she would like the Council to consider.
18. The Council had given Ms X enough information to know that a change in her finances may lead to a payment becoming due.
19. Although Ms X is distressed by fees due, as the Council was not made aware of a change in her finances, it has not caused fees to accrue.

Back to top

Final decision

20. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman