Recent statements in this category are shown below:
-
Seaham Care Limited (25 012 758)
Statement Upheld Charging 11-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Care Provider failed to repay an overpayment it owed Mrs Z. The Provider repaid the money during our investigation. Further investigation would achieve nothing worthwhile.
-
North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 013 003)
Statement Upheld Charging 11-Aug-2026
Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his grandmother, Mrs X, that the Council gave incorrect advice and wrongly charged for her care. Mrs X was overcharged because the Council failed to action a request to cancel visits. During the investigation, the Council accepted fault, apologised, applied a credit of £367.64 to Mrs X's account, issued a revised invoice and reminded staff to clearly explain financial assessments, care package implementation and charging arrangements before care begins. I am satisfied these actions provide a suitable remedy for the injustice caused and make no further recommendations.
-
London Borough of Bromley (25 030 286)
Statement Upheld Charging 11-Aug-2026
Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to provide an appropriate choice of accommodation and for not assessing Mr Y’s capacity or the impact on Mr Y’s well-being of moving care home. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X, pay Mr Y’s care fees and assess whether Mr Y can move care home.
-
Statement Upheld Charging 10-Aug-2026
Summary: There was fault by the Council, because a social worker gave the complainant’s family incorrect advice about the charging process for adult social care. We are satisfied, though, this misinformation did not alter what the complainant had to pay for her care, and the Council’s apology remedies the remaining injustice. We have therefore completed our investigation.
-
London Borough of Enfield (25 022 335)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 10-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to apply a discretionary property disregard. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
-
Hertfordshire County Council (25 005 357)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 10-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mrs X’s adult social care. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify us investigating.
-
West Sussex County Council (25 012 772)
Statement Not upheld Charging 09-Aug-2026
Summary: On behalf of Miss X, Mrs Y complained the Council failed to inform them of the full cost of Miss X’s care for approximately one year. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
-
Wakefield Metropolitan District Council (25 007 911)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 09-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to backdate Mr X’s financial assessment. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation.
-
Statement Upheld Charging 05-Aug-2026
Summary: The care provider was at fault because its contract and terms and conditions did not explain how it would treat funded nursing care payments. The care provider has agreed to apologise to Mr X to acknowledge the confusion and uncertainty this caused and amend its contract and terms and conditions
-
Essex County Council (25 018 499)
Statement Not upheld Charging 05-Aug-2026
Summary: Mr J complained the Council had wrongly assessed his finances and as a result was wrongly charging him for the cost of his care and support and transport. We have ended our investigation as the Council has now re-assessed Mr J’s finances, determined he has no contribution to make and cleared his debt. There is therefore nothing further we can achieve by investigating.