Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council charging Mr X a contribution toward the cost of his care. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable which would justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council began charging him a contribution toward the cost of his care from December 2024 although it had not done so before this. He said the Council had caused him extreme distress as his outstanding invoices have built up.
2. Mr X is seeking a waiver of the unpaid costs and an agreement he does not have to contribute toward 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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, 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. The Council provides non residential care for Mr X and has done so for a number of years.
7. In December 2024, the Council reviewed Mr X’s financial assessment and found his income had increased since it’s last assessment. The Council wrote to Mr X and explained he would now be charged a contribution toward his care costs.
8. In February 2025, Mr X complained to the Council that he had received a bill for about £300.
9. The Council responded and explained it had carried out a review as it had been two years since it assessed Mr X’s finances, and that an increase in his income meant he now had enough money to fall within the threshold where the Council can charge.
10. The Council went on to explain the minimum income guarantee and how this is used to calculate the amount Mr X is required to pay.
11. The Council recognised Mr X’s complaint the Council had not provided enough support. It apologised and arranged an in person meeting to further explain Mr X’s contribution, it offered to reassess his finances, to help Mr X put in place an ‘invoicee’ so his bills would be sent to a person of his choice, and arranged an in person meeting with his social worker and her senior social worker to talk through any concerns about his support needs.
12. The Council is entitled to review Mr X’s financial assessment periodically to ensure the information it has is up to date and accurate.
13. The Council has explained why payment is due and sent regular four weekly bills since they became due. It has also offered increased support to help Mr X once he said he needed this.
14. This office does not make decisions as to whether a contribution is due. The Council has carried out a review and made a decision it is entitled to make. It has also offered to support Mr X further to help to manage this.
15. On this basis, if we were to investigate Mr X’s complaint, it is unlikely we would find fault about the financial review. On the support Mr X has been given, we would not be likely to add to what the Council has already offered.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman