Summary
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council backdating collection of fees for her late mother Mrs Y’s care home placement. Letters the Council sent in 2021 created incorrect expectations for Ms X around the fees Mrs Y had to pay. The Council also delayed in advising Mrs Y of the correct fee, which was fault. But neither issue gives grounds for us to expect the Council to waive part of Mrs Y’s care fees.
The complaint
Ms X is the late Mrs Y’s daughter and executor of Mrs Y’s estate. Ms X complains the Council: initially told her that her mother’s care placement would cost £165.56 per week, then increased the cost to £762.40; delayed for four months before telling her the £762.40 cost.
The Council is requiring Ms X as the executor to pay the backdated costs, which she says is a potential financial loss to the beneficiaries of Mrs Y’s estate. She says the matter has caused her great amounts of additional stress and worry and affected her mental health at an already distressing time while she is grieving.
Ms X wants the Council to honour the £165.56 weekly cost from the start of Mrs Y’s final care home placement in home B, until 11 March 2022, the date she was told of the £762.40 cost. Ms X says she would agree to pay that higher cost from the date of the March letter up to the date of her mother’s death.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council sent letters dated 23 October 2021 to Mrs Y. The first letter does not refer to the care placement Mrs Y was in at the time of the letter, in home B. It refers to a different one, home A. The second letter is headed ‘Community care statement’. This refers to support Mrs Y previously received in her own home so also does not relate to Mrs Y’s placement in home B. Neither letter mentions home B at all. The Council says the letters were created before Mrs Y’s financial assessment information and new care provision placement in home B had been put on the system.
It is unfortunate the letters were sent as they resulted in confusion around Mrs Y’s care costs, and incorrect expectations by Ms X of the amount Mrs Y would need to pay per week at home B. But we cannot say the weekly care cost quoted in the letters were ever to be applied to Mrs Y’s stay at home B, which is what Ms X wants. This is because neither letter made any reference to Mrs Y’s care costs in home B. So there are no grounds for us to say the Council should honour or be bound by the figures in either letter as part of the outcome sought from Ms X’s complaint about Mrs Y’s fees.
The Council did not inform Mrs Y and Ms X of the correct weekly cost of the care placement in home B for over four months after the October 2021 letters. That delay was fault. But the delay is not grounds for the correct fee to be waived, which is what Ms X seeks. This is because Mrs Y still received the benefit of that care provision while at home B, the cost of which was the higher one. The Council has apologised to Ms X for the delay, which is the outcome we may have sought here had it not already been provided.
There is dispute between Ms X and the Council about the contents of her telephone calls to an officer about the Council’s October 2021 fees letters. We cannot resolve that disagreement and make a finding on what was discussed in those calls because there are no recordings available. We could not add anything to the Council’s investigation of these matters. Investigation of the calls by us would not result in a different outcome here, nor inform matters further.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because: letters the Council sent in 2021 regarding care fees did not refer to the fee due for Mrs Y for her actual placement in home B, so do not now give grounds for us to expect the Council to honour fee amounts mentioned in the letters or waive any part of the correct fee; and the Council’s delay in advising Mrs Y of the correct fee was fault, but that fault does not justify us requiring the Council to waive the care fees for Mrs Y’s care home placement; and the Council has apologised for its fault which is the outcome we may have sought had it not already been provided; and we could not add to the Council’s previous investigation of matters, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman