Recent statements in this category are shown below:
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (25 000 429)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 29-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to fund travel costs to a day centre he chooses to attend outside of its area. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 29-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that her mother Mrs Y’s financial gifts to family members were deprivations of her assets required for care home fees. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision‑making process to warrant us investigating.
-
Manchester City Council (24 017 059)
Statement Upheld Charging 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Miss X complained that the Council did not tell her that her late mother’s, Mrs T, placement at a nursing home required a third-party fee to be paid in addition to the Council’s payment to the care home which has left her with a significant care fees debt to pay. There was no fault by the Council with how it calculated and charged Mrs T for her nursing care fees. But there was fault by the Council’s for its slight delay in completing Mrs T’s financial assessment, but this caused no injustice to Mrs T. The Council was also at fault for its failure to take proactive steps to recover Mrs T’s accrued care fees debt. This caused an injustice to Miss X and the Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.
-
Norfolk County Council (25 000 229)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his mother Mrs Y’s domiciliary care, arranged by the Council. There is insufficient significant injustice to Mrs Y, Mr X or other family to warrant us investigating and investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council incorrectly calculating Disability Related Expenditures in its financial assessment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council assessed Miss X’s contribution to her care costs. It is unlikely we would find fault with how the Council had made its decision or that an investigation would achieve a different outcome. Miss X’s mother, Mrs Y, can also ask the Council for an appeal through its financial assessment policy.
-
Norfolk County Council (24 013 283)
Statement Upheld Charging 24-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly decided his father Mr Y had deprived himself of assets to avoid care costs. There was fault in how the Council considered this, which causes doubt about the outcome of its decision making. The Council agreed to apologise, pay a financial remedy to Mr X and Mr Y for distress, and reconsider its deprivation of assets case for Mr Y. It will also deliver training to its staff about deprivation of assets and ensure its financial assessment appeals process aligns with its published policies.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 002 185)
Statement Upheld Charging 23-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the charges made by the Council for her mothers care home place. There was fault. The Council took too long to resolve a situation in which the care home was paid twice. It has now reached an agreement to get a refund from the care home and cancel the invoices to Mrs M. To remedy the distress and inconvenience Mrs M was put to and to remedy the Council’s poor communication the Council apologised and made a payment to Mrs X. There was no fault in the Council’s decision there was no reablement care. Or its decision that Mrs M should contribute financially during the 12 week period when the value of her property was disregarded.
-
Staffordshire County Council (24 013 429)
Statement Upheld Charging 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs Y complained about the Council’s charging under a Deferred Payment Agreement for the residential care service for her mother. We found fault with the Council in not providing enough information about Deferred Payment Agreements and in the way it calculated care charges. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Mrs Y. The Council has already offered suitable personal remedies and has carried out some service improvements. The Council has agreed to continue improving its services by ensuring more comprehensive information is available for people considering Deferred Payment Agreements.
-
Kent County Council (24 016 495)
Statement Not upheld Charging 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms D complained the Council did not explain what a third party top up is or explain how the fees for respite care for her mother, Ms M, was calculated. This caused her financial and emotional distress. The Council is not at fault. It explained the fees to Ms D.