Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Northamptonshire County Council (20 011 226)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 03-Aug-2021

    Summary: The Council assessed Mrs Y in line with its charging policy and in line with Annex C of Care and Support Statutory Guidance and so there was no fault in charging Mrs Y for her care.

  • Royal Borough of Greenwich (20 009 397)

    Statement Upheld Charging 03-Aug-2021

    Summary: There was fault by the Council as it failed to arrange an independent valuation of Mrs Y's interest in a property. The Council has now taken appropriate action to remedy the injustice by arranging a valuation.

  • East Riding of Yorkshire Council (20 010 664)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 30-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the way the Council calculated Mrs X's financial contribution towards her care package. They say they cannot afford to pay it and this has caused them financial difficulties. The Council was not at fault.

  • Staffordshire County Council (20 009 532)

    Statement Upheld Charging 30-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to properly set up deferred payment arrangement for her mother Mrs Y and did not provide enough information. It also delayed sending the final invoice. Mrs X says this caused her much distress and worry about paying for Mrs Y's care. We found the Council did fail to set up a deferred payment arrangement properly but did provide enough information. It also delayed the final invoice. This caused Mrs X uncertainty and stress. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Mrs X £150. It will also take action to avoid similar problems in future.

  • Norfolk County Council (20 014 006)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 27-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council did not carry out a financial assessment or provide her with sufficient financial advice when her late husband, Mr X, moved into a residential care home in July 2018. This meant she used his life insurance money to pay for his care fees. There was no fault by the Council.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (20 009 479)

    Statement Upheld Charging 27-Jul-2021

    Summary: The Council failed to ensure the late Mrs X and her family were properly informed of the financial implications of her move into assisted accommodation and failed to reassess her needs once she moved. It failed to properly consider her mental capacity to make a decision about her finances. The Council will now apologise to Mrs X's family for the distress and frustration caused by its faults, waive the care charges and offer a sum in recognition of the distress.

  • London Borough of Islington (20 009 854)

    Statement Upheld Charging 27-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs C complained the Council failed to put her mother on the NHS Continuing Health Care (CHC) Fast Track Pathway. As a result, her mother had to pay for her nursing home care, rather than it being free of charge. We found fault, because there were missed opportunities to refer Mrs C's mother for a CHA reassessment. The Council has greed to apologise and pay a remedy for Mrs C's distress.

  • Essex County Council (20 009 664)

    Statement Upheld Charging 27-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council has failed to consider a discretionary property disregard for her mother's property after Mrs X's daughter turned 18 and has failed to progress a deferred payment agreement, leaving her mother paying for all her care and her daughter at risk of losing her home. The Council failed to give proper consideration to a discretionary property disregard but has now corrected that error. It is not at fault over the deferred payment agreement, as Mrs X has not accepted one for her mother.

  • Wakefield City Council (20 009 400)

    Statement Not upheld Charging 26-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her with clear information about how to access Council support to pay her mother's care home fees, whilst she awaited court-appointed deputyship enabling her to access her mother's finances. The Council was not at fault.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (20 007 088)

    Statement Upheld Charging 23-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's refusal to obtain an independent valuation of jointly owned property when assessing his contribution towards residential care home fees. We find the Council was at fault for not doing so. The Council has already agreed to arrange a valuation. The Council has also agreed to apologise for not doing so sooner.