Summary: Miss X complained the Council is chasing her brother for a Community Care charge debt. Miss X disputes the validity of the debt and says her brother did not receive the care charged for. We found fault with the Council charging for care since July 2017. We did not find fault with the Council charging for care up to this point. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss X and remove all charges from 1 July 2017. The Council also agreed to write to Miss X to confirm the outstanding balance owed and offer an arrangement to repay the remaining outstanding balance owed in instalments.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council is chasing her brother, Mr Y, for debt owed for community care charges accrued from 2016 to 2018. Miss X says she only became aware of this debt in December 2022 after Mr Y’s mother could no longer manage Mr Y’s care contributions.
2. Miss X says the Council cannot provide a breakdown of this debt or explain why it is owed and states that Mr Y has not received the care charged for by the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have exercised my discretion to investigate Miss X’s complaint because she only became aware of the debt owed to the Council in December 2022. Before then, Mr Y’s mother managed his finances for his care contributions with the Council. Following her passing away in 2023, Miss X became responsible. Since Mr Y does not have capacity to manage his own financial affairs, the first opportunity Miss X had at raising concerns about the charges was in 2023 following her becoming the nominee.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have considered all the information Miss X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
8. Miss X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Rules and Regulations

9. Councils must assess anybody in their area who appears in need of care services. Following an assessment the Council must decide which needs are eligible for their support. If the Council provides support it must produce a written Care Plan.
10. Where a council assesses a person’s needs and agrees to provide care, it should set a personal budget in a care and support plan. A personal budget is a statement which specifies the cost to the local authority of meeting eligible needs, the amount a person must contribute and the amount the council must contribute.
11. Councils can charge people towards the cost of a care home placement. They complete a financial assessment, applying charging rules in regulations and guidance to determine how much a person pays.

What happened

12. On 25 November 2016, the Council completed a care assessment of Mr Y. The Council produced a care and support plan and shared this with Mr Y and Mr Y’s mother. This care and support plan detailed two days a week at Radiomarathon costing £130 and 7.5 hours of 1:1 support at his flat costing £121.58.
13. Mr Y started to receive the support from the care and support plan on 28 November 2016.
14. The Council completed a financial assessment of Mr Y on 27 February 2017. The Council’s financial assessment said Mr Y’s client care contributions were £74.90 per week. The Council sent a copy of this financial assessment to Mr Y and his mother.
15. The Council started sending monthly invoices for care costs to Mr Y and his mother in March 2017.
16. On 24 May 2017, the Council completed a financial reassessment of Mr Y confirming his client care contributions of £75.30 per week.
17. Mr Y stopped attending Radiomarathon and moved out of his flat in July 2017. Radiomarathon stopped billing the Council for the care costs but the 1:1 care provider continued to send billing to the Council.
18. The Council continued to send monthly invoices for Mr Y’s care costs because the 1:1 care costs alone were above Mr Y’s client care contribution level.
19. On 11 December 2017, the Council completed an annual review of Mr Y’s care and support plan. The annual reviewers’ notes in the annual review stated:
• Mr Y’s “support package was closed in July” but he wanted to look into direct payments again.
• Mr Y stopped attending Radiomarathon in July 2017 because he did find it suitable for him.
• Mr Y moved out of his previous flat in July 2017 but did not move into his new flat as planned and instead moved back in with his family.
• Mr Y’s family was now supporting him following his move into a new property recently.
20. On the same date, the annual reviewer made a case note about Mr Y moving out of his flat in July 2017. The annual review said “support provision with” the 1:1 support provider “should be suspended as well as Radiomarathon”.
21. On 17 January 2018, the Council sent Mr Y and his mother a letter advising of the debt owed for Mr Y’s client care contributions.
22. On 16 March 2018, the Council’s case notes confirmed Mr Y stopped attending Radiomarathon and receiving support from his 1:1 support provider and it needed to close his care package. The Council closed Radiomarathon from 30 July 2017 and the 1:1 support provider from 16 March 2018.
23. The Council sent letters to Mr Y’s mother in 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 about the debt owed to the Council for Mr Y’s client care contributions.
24. On 23 December 2022, Miss X contacted the Council to query the debt. She told the Council her mother said this debt should be cleared.
25. The Council asked Miss X to provide evidence of confirmation the debt would be cleared. Miss X advised she did not know who promised to clear the debt as her mother usually deals with Mr Y’s matters. The Council advised Miss X to look for evidence and provide this to it.
26. Miss X queried the debt again in March 2023. The Council completed an internal enquiry and confirmed the debt was valid. The Council did not respond to Miss X at this time.
27. The Council sent a debt chaser letter for Mr Y’s debt in October 2023. Miss X queried the debt in November 2023 and advised she had not received a response from her previous contact.
28. The Council and Miss X liaised about the debt in November 2023 before the Council reiterated to Miss X the debt was valid.

Analysis

29. The Council assessed Mr Y in 2016 and produced a care and support plan for his needs. Within this care and support plan the Council produced a personal budget for Mr Y’s care to confirm the maximum cost of his care. The Council shared the care and support plan with Mr Y and his mother.
30. I am satisfied the Council took the correct steps to assess Mr Y’s care needs and tell both Mr Y and his mother about the potential cost of his care in 2016. I do not find fault.
31. The Council started to provide Mr Y with the support detailed in the care and support plan from 28 November 2016. While Miss X has disputed Mr Y received care and support from the Council, the evidence shows Mr Y received this care.
32. The Council completed two financial assessments of Mr Y in 2017 which confirmed his client care contributions. The Council followed up these financial assessments with production of monthly billing for Mr Y’s care costs, the first of which the Council backdated to 28 November 2016. The Council has acted correctly to assess Mr Y’s contributions to the cost of his care and produced regular billing which shows these costs. I do not find fault with the Council.
33. Mr Y stopped attending Radiomarathon in July 2017. The Council has confirmed it has not billed for Radiomarathon after July 2017. However, the Council has continued to charge for Mr Y’s 1:1 support from July 2017 until 16 March 2018.
34. The Council has not been able to evidence that Mr Y accessed 1:1 support after July 2017. However, the Council has advised on checking its records the 1:1 support provider has not billed it for Y’s care since week ending 3 December 2017. The Council initially proposed to remove all charges raised since this date.
35. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
36. The evidence provided shows, on the balance of probabilities, Mr Y likely stopped receiving 1:1 support after July 2017. The care plan review completed in December 2017 confirmed Mr Y moved out of his flat in July 2017 and did not move into the planned new flat. This care plan also confirmed Y’s family was supporting him and not the 1:1 support provider. The reviewers notes also confirm the 1:1 support should be suspended alongside Radiomarathon. Since the Council has no evidence Mr Y received care after July 2017, such as care notes or records, and the reviewers notes imply the 1:1 support stopped alongside Radiomarathon, I do not consider that Mr Y received care after July 2017.
37. Since the Council did not provide any care to Mr Y after July 2017, it should not charge Mr Y’s client care contributions after this date. The Council has agreed to this rationale and agreed to remove all care charges after 1 July 2017. The Council should confirm with Miss X any remaining balance owed for the charges from 28 November 2016 to 1 July 2017. The Council should offer Miss X a repayment arrangement to pay any remaining balance owed in instalments.
38. The Council acted correctly to send reminder letters to Mr Y and his mother from 2017 to 2023. The Council was chasing a, partially, valid debt. The Council has acted patiently in chasing this debt and I do not find fault.
39. The Council failed to provide a response to Miss X in March 2023 following her contact to query the debt. This was fault. This fault resulted in one further warning letter being sent about debt collection. The Council should apologise for its delay in responding to Miss X’s query.

Back to top

Agreed action

40. Within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Council should:
• Remove all client care contribution charges for Mr Y’s care after 1 July 2017 and confirm the outstanding balance owed for his client care contributions from 28 November 2016 to 1 July 2017.
• Offer Miss X a payment arrangements to repay any remaining outstanding balance in instalments.
• Provide an apology to Miss X for the delays in responding to her contact on March 2023 and confusion caused by this matter.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

42. There was fault by the Council as the Council has agreed to my recommendations, I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman