Recent statements in this category are shown below:
-
Statement Upheld Charging 23-Dec-2025
Summary: The complaint is the Council gave incorrect advice to Mr B which led to him agreeing to move his mother between nursing homes, on the understanding nothing would change in her care and support. But instead the Council carried out an assessment and Mr B’s mother was liable for her care costs. The Council then delayed responding to his complaint and said it had sent a response when it had not. The Ombudsman’s decision is there is no documentary evidence of the Council’s involvement in the move or in giving the family any advice. There was some delay in its carrying out an assessment and responding to Mr B’s complaint. But these did not cause a significant enough injustice to warrant a further remedy.
-
Kent County Council (25 006 254)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 23-Dec-2025
Summary: Representatives for the late Mrs X complained that she did not receive the care and support she should have in a short-term residential care unit operated by Kent County Council and Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust. We decided not to investigate the complaint. Mrs X has died, so an investigation would not achieve a remedy for her.
-
Cheshire West & Chester Council (25 005 050)
Statement Upheld Charging 19-Dec-2025
Summary: Mr B complained that the Council had sent him invoices for dates when a service had not been provided and he said the invoices were confusing and lacked transparency. The Council has already upheld Mr B’s complaint and we agree there was fault. The Council has agreed to pay a symbolic financial remedy and carry out a service improvement.
-
Statement Not upheld Charging 17-Dec-2025
Summary: There is no fault in the Council’s decision not to disregard capital from March to December 2024 when carrying out a financial assessment for care home fees. The financial injustice to Mr X, caused by the late payment of the mortgage, was not the fault of the Council.
-
London Borough of Brent (24 021 623)
Statement Upheld Charging 15-Dec-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council has charged Mrs Y for more care hours than she received each week. He also complained that the care provider did not provide the agreed level of support. We found the errors and lack of clarity in the way the Council billed Mrs Y is fault. As was the failure to ensure Mrs Y consistently received the agreed level of care. These faults have caused Mrs Y and Mr X an injustice. Mrs Y did not receive the care she needed and had paid for. The Council will apologise and make payments to Mrs Y and Mr X. It will also review Mrs X’s care charges and its monitoring arrangements.
-
Essex County Council (24 022 753)
Statement Upheld Charging 15-Dec-2025
Summary: Miss X complained on behalf of her late mother, Mrs Y, about the Council’s handling of care charges while Mrs Y was in residential care. Miss X complains the Council failed to provide information about care charges in a timely manner and invoiced Mrs Y for increased care charges without prior discussion. Miss X says the Council’s actions caused significant avoidable distress. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and a financial remedy and make service improvements.
-
Essex County Council (24 023 221)
Statement Upheld Charging 15-Dec-2025
Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide full information regarding Mrs Y’s care home fees or to explain that Mrs Y would be responsible for the cost of 1 to 1 care in addition to the standard care home charges. We found the Council’s failure properly explain how much Mrs Y would be charged for her care, or for what period of time is fault. The Council’s failure to identify a suitable nursing home for Mrs Y is also fault. These faults meant Miss X received an unexpected substantial bill for Mrs Y’s care which caused Mrs Y’s family shock and distress. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mrs Y’s family.
-
Rockley Dene Homes Ltd (24 008 384)
Statement Upheld Charging 12-Dec-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that a care provider was not fair and transparent when it increased charges each year. The terms and conditions in the contract provided by the Care Provider were not transparent which caused injustice as the annual increases were not clear. Mr X’s mother did not pay above the standard annual increase so there was no financial injustice. The Care Provider has amended the terms and conditions to remedy the injustice.
-
Lancashire County Council (25 001 647)
Statement Upheld Charging 11-Dec-2025
Summary: There was fault by the Council in its financial assessment process and a delay in responding to the complaint. This caused Ms X avoidable confusion and time and trouble. The Council has already apologised and refunded an invoice Ms X had already paid. This Council will issue a further written apology, make a symbolic payment and deliver training for staff in the adult social care team on the charging rules and guidance.
-
Salford City Council (24 021 296)
Statement Upheld Charging 08-Dec-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to tell Ms M and her family about the charges for her short-term respite care and failing to carry out a financial assessment. The Council has already apologised and offered to waive the charges. This remedies the injustice.