Summary: Miss Z complained on behalf of her father that the Council wrongly charged him for 45 minute care calls after agreeing to reduce them to 30 minutes. The Council accepts it did not act in a timely manner and has proposed a suitable remedy. This includes refunding the cost of the extra 15 minutes and making a symbolic payment to Miss Z to recognise her inconvenience.

The complaint

1. Miss Z, on behalf of her father Mr X, complains he was charged for 45 minutes care calls after it was agreed the calls would be reduced to 30 minutes.
2. Miss Z says this has caused distress and had a financial impact.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. 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

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant’s representative;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant and taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Charging for social care services

6. A council has a duty to arrange care and support for those with eligible needs, and a power to meet both eligible and non-eligible needs in places other than care homes. A council can choose to charge for non-residential care following a person’s needs assessment. Where it decides to charge, the council must follow the Care and Support (Charging and Assessment of Resources) Regulations 2014 and have regard to the Care Act statutory guidance. (Care Act 2014, section 14 and 17)

Key facts

7. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
8. The Council assessed Mr X’s care needs and determined that one care visit of 45 minutes per day should take place. The Council also completed a financial assessment and determined that Mr X’s maximum weekly contribution would be £127.41. This meant Mr X would pay the full cost of his care.
9. Mr X and his family expressed concerns about the affordability of the package of care. They also expressed concerns about the length of time the carers were attending and said this often not the full 45 minutes. In October, the Council agreed the care visit would reduce to 30 minutes a day on seven days a week.
10. The Council did not contact the care provider until December about the time reduction. The care provider raised concerns saying it could not provide the care within 30 minutes. The Council did not change the arrangement with the care provider and continued to discuss what was appropriate. There is nothing to suggest the Council explained this to Mr X and his family. As a result the care provider continued to provide 45 minute daily calls and to charge Mr X for this amount. The period in question is 12 October 2023 to 31 January 2024.
11. In January Miss Z contacted the Council about her father being charged for 45 minute calls. She said Mr X would be really upset if he knew about this and so Miss Z was covering the extra cost herself. She asked the Council for advice. The care provider was not able to either reduce the length of the care calls or the number of days. Miss Z raised the issue of changing to another care provider and the Council said it would speak to its commissioners but could not guarantee this could happen.
12. Miss Z contacted the Council again saying she wanted to reduce the care package to 30 minute visits and that she was struggling to pay the additional £40 per week. Miss Z spoke to a council officer and explained the door bell camera was showing the carers most days were only there for 30 minutes and that she was working an extra job to help her father pay for the care. The Council spoke with the care provider who disputed that most calls were only 30 minutes and said its carers use GPS trackers to clock in and out.
13. After further representations by Miss Z, a new care provider was identified and began providing care in February. Miss Z and Mr X are satisfied with the new care provider. Miss Z did not continue to pursue her complaint once the care provider changed. Miss Z was not aware that as the Council commissioned the care, she could complain to the Council.

Analysis

14. In response to my enquiries the Council accepts that it agreed on 12 October 2023 to reduce the care calls to 30 minutes. It also accepts it failed to take timely action to make this change to the care package and that this had a financial impact on Mr X. It has proposed a remedy, which I have set out below, and which I consider is an appropriate remedy.

Back to top

Agreed action

15. To remedy the injustice caused as a result of the fault identified above the Council will, within one month of my final decision, take the following action:
• Apologise to Miss Z and Mr X;
• Make a refund of £671.44 in respect of the additional care costs incurred for the additional 15 minutes per day from 12 October 2023 to 31 January 2024; and
• Make Miss Z a symbolic payment of £200 to recognise her inconvenience and time and trouble in pursuing this matter.
16. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
17. I welcome the Council’s acceptance of the fault in this case and that it has proposed a remedy. It says it will share lessons learnt with its Practice Assurance Group which will review and amend working practices where necessary and provide briefings to staff of any changes.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault for the reasons explained in this statement. The Council has agreed to implement the actions I have recommended. These appropriately remedy any injustice caused by fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman