Devon County Council (25 007 524)

Statement Upheld Charging 11-May-2026

Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of her mother, Mrs Y, about delays in the Council’s financial assessment of her residential care charges. Mrs X also complained the Council did not respond to her emails and did not keep her informed about how it assessed Mrs Y’s capital. Mrs X says the Council’s actions caused significant avoidable distress and uncertainty. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy and arrange an appointment to discuss payment of the care charges.

Gloucestershire County Council (25 012 781)

Statement Upheld Charging 10-May-2026

Summary: There has been fault by the Council. It did not clearly communicate, in writing, the financial contribution that Mr D should make when his property value was disregarded for the first 12 weeks he was in residential care. An apology and review of procedures remedies the injustice, as the charges made by the Council were correct.

London Borough of Redbridge (25 018 382)

Statement Upheld Charging 10-May-2026

Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed in dealing with his enquiry about a deferred payment agreement, causing significant distress. We have upheld this complaint because the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy to Mr X in recognition of the injustice caused.

Cherry Lodge Rest Home Ltd (25 020 062)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 10-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Care Home’s refusal to refund fees. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable if we were to investigate.

Essex County Council (25 007 489)

Statement Upheld Charging 07-May-2026

Summary: Mrs X complained the Council wrongly asked her daughter, Miss Y, to contribute to the costs of her care and support using her benefit money. The Council was at fault for not considering Mrs X’s claimed expenses and confirming the position to her at the earliest opportunity, and for not passing on information from its financial assessment team when Mrs X asked for a re-assessment. The Council agreed to apologise for the frustration and uncertainty this caused. However, there was no fault in the Council’s financial assessment.

Manchester City Council (25 019 820)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 07-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council communicated about and dealt with Mr A’s care costs. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

South Gloucestershire Council (25 022 340)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 07-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about backdated care fees and payment reminders from the Council following the cancellation of the bill as there is insufficient remaining injustice arising from this to justify our further involvement.

Kent County Council (25 011 660)

Statement Not upheld Charging 06-May-2026

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to tell him it had decided to charge him for care before he moved into supported living. We find no fault in how the Council communicated the care charges to Mr X.

Birmingham City Council (25 017 513)

Statement Upheld Charging 06-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in completing a financial assessment for Mr Y. This is because the Council has remedied the matter to the Ombudsman’s satisfaction.

Manchester City Council (25 019 294)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 05-May-2026

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.