Liverpool City Council (24 020 792)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 20-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in the Council completing Mrs Y’s financial assessment. The Council has apologised for frustration the delay caused the family. We could not say delays caused a quantifiable financial injustice so we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks. There is insufficient evidence of fault in other elements of the complaint to warrant investigation.

Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (24 008 017)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 18-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this about how the Council has carried out a financial assessment to determine the complainant’s contribution charges for care. This is there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant investigation.

Staffordshire County Council (24 013 503)

Statement Upheld Charging 18-May-2025

Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to deal properly with the charges for his son’s care. The Council accepts there was a long delay in completing the son’s financial assessment and has written off some of the charges. There is no other evidence of fault by the Council.

Norfolk County Council (24 020 651)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 18-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charging for residential adult social care. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council charging for care which Ms C received and was told she would need to pay for. The delay in billing does not mean the charges are not due. There is not a significant enough injustice caused by delays to justify an Ombudsman investigation.

Alliance Community Home Care Ltd (24 020 788)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 18-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an information request and other matters. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider complaints about how organisations handle people’s data. Complaints about the Care Provider’s decision to recover unpaid care charges are being considered by the courts, and the Care Provider has not yet had the opportunity to consider complaints about the quality of Mrs Y’s care.

Buckinghamshire Council (24 008 864)

Statement Upheld Charging 15-May-2025

Summary: Mr X complained the Council charged the late Mrs Y for respite care after telling the family it would be free. He also complained Mrs Y spent longer than planned in respite care due to the Council’s poor communication and management of the case. This caused the family distress. We found the Council at fault for failing to provide clear and timely information about charges for Mrs Y’s respite care. But we did not find the Council at fault over the time Mrs Y spent in respite. The Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment for the distress caused.

Kent County Council (24 019 822)

Statement Upheld Charging 14-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council pursing him for his late father’s care debt. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes as the Council has offered a suitable remedy.

Bupa Care Homes (AKW) Limited (24 019 855)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 14-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about increased Care Provider fees because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

City of Doncaster Council (24 021 463)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 14-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a financial assessment in 2023 and that the Council has refused to explain why he was not charged for care between 2018 and 2023. Part of the complaint is late and there is insufficient injustice to warrant an investigation.

Durham County Council (24 020 198)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 14-May-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about poor care by his late mother’s care provider. He says they ignored medication instructions which led to medication being administered incorrectly. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault.