Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that his late father’s care provider failed to raise invoices for care fees in a timely manner. This is because the likely fault has not caused any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains his late father’s care provider failed to raise invoices for care fees in a timely manner. He also complains there was a delay in the care provider requesting a signature for agreement to the terms and conditions of residence. He says this led to his father accruing arrears.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s father, Mr Z, was placed in a residential care home in June 2021. In November 2021, Ms X's mother was told Mr Z would need to pay for the full cost of his care due to having above the capital threshold. Mr X’s mother was told the care home would be in touch to agree how and when to pay the fees.
6. In May 2023, Mr X says his mother received an invoice for just over £64700 to cover the care fees for the period September 2021 to April 2023. Mr X says his mother was also asked at this point to sign the terms and conditions of residence.
7. In September 2024, the care home sent a final invoice for over £43800. This was due to the Council agreeing to pay Mr Z’s care fees for the period March to August 2024.
8. If we were to investigate, it is likely we would find fault with the care provider for not issuing the invoices for Mr Z’s care fees in a timely manner as the first invoice was not provided until nearly two years after Mr Z first started receiving care. It is also likely we would find fault for the care provider not seeking a signature for agreement to the terms and conditions of residence.
9. However, an investigation is not justified as the likely fault has not caused any significant injustice. This is because Mr Z is still in the same position he would have been if the invoices had been issued in a timely manner. I have made this decision because:
• Mr Z was assessed as needing to pay for the full cost of his care.
• Had the care provider invoiced Mr Z’s wife in a timely manner, he would have paid the invoices at the time. So, Mr Z would have incurred these costs.
• The care provider has now charged Mr Z the fees for the full period he received care. This is the same amount as he would have been charged had the care provider invoiced in a timely manner. So, the delay in the invoice being issued did not cause Mr Z any financial loss or detriment as he is still paying the exact same amount.
10. With regards to the delay in obtaining agreement to the terms and conditions of residence, I am also satisfied this did not cause any significant injustice. This is because Mr X has not indicated they disagreed with the terms and conditions or had any concerns about the care provided by the care home.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the likely fault has not caused any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman