The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council charging her father for his care and support and about failing to consider her father’s expenses in his financial assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
The complaint
Mrs X complains about the Council charging her father for his care and support. She said the Council told them her father’s care would be free. She also complains the Council failed to consider her father’s expenses in his financial assessment.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X’s previously provided care to her father, Mr Z. In 2021, Mrs X contacted the Council and asked for support with Mr Z. Discussion was held about placing Mr Z into a care home for respite. The Council’s records detailed it told Mrs X that Mr Z may need to pay a client contribution if he did go to a care home.
In March 2022, Mrs X told the Council she was no longer well enough to care for Mr Z. The Council explained to Mrs X she may need to pay a top up fee if she wanted her father to go to a care home that cost more than the Council’s rate.
In April 2022, the Council sent Mrs X a letter detailing that Mr Z had to pay an initial client contribution of £250 per week, pending a financial assessment. The letter also noted that if the assessed amount following the financial assessment was different to the initial contribution, then any change would be backdated to the beginning of Mr Z’s stay at the home.
A further letter was sent to Mrs X in July 2022, which again detailed Mr Z’s initial contribution as no financial information held. The Council asked Mrs X to return a statement of financial circumstances form and noted that once this information was received, the Council would complete a financial assessment. The Council would then write to confirm or revise the amount to be paid, and that if the assessed amount if different from the initial contribution, then any change would be backdated to the beginning of Mr Z’s stay at the home.
The financial information returned to the Council detailed that Mr Z’s property and savings amount to above the capital threshold of £23,250. In October and November 2022, the Council contacted Mrs X to confirm that the value of Mr Z’s home would be considered and that a deferred payment agreement could be arranged to allow Mr Z to defer the costs. Mrs X was unhappy with this.
There is no evidence to suggest the Council told Mrs X that Mr Z’s care and support would be provided for free. The records showed the Council sent Mrs X two letters which detailed the initial contributions Mr Z had to pay and these letters clearly notified that these initial contributions were subject to change depending on the financial assessment.
Once the Council received the financial information to be aware that Mr Z had capital over the threshold, it appropriately told Mrs X of the fact Mr Z would be a full cost payer and advised her of the schemes available to allow Mr Z to defer his care costs.
An investigation is therefore not justified as we are not likely to find fault with the Council. The Council provided clear information of the initial charges and the fact these charges were subject to change depending on the outcome of the financial assessment.
Regarding the expenses, I note Mrs X is concerned the Council did not consider his expenses for items related to his personal care, such as toiletries, incontinence, sustenance, clothes, and food. The law allows for those receiving care in a care home to receive the personal expense allowance. This is an amount that is disregard from income to allow the individual to keep money to meet the expenses Mrs X referenced.
The Council has provided a copy of the financial assessments completed for Mr Z. This showed the Council had accounted for the personal expense allowance, as well as Mr Z’s weekly mortgage expenses.
Therefore, an investigation is not justified as we are not likely to find fault with the financial assessment. This is because the Council has completed the assessment in line with the law and statutory guidance.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman