Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council managed Ms X’s request for a Deferred Payment Agreement for the care charges for her late mother Mrs A.

Summary: The Council did not properly consider all the relevant information before it concluded that avoidance of care charges was the significant motive for the late Mrs X gifting some money to her daughters. In addition a delay in notification that care charges were due meant that Mr A, her son, had already finalised her estate when the Council invoiced him for Mrs X’s care. The Council agrees to remedy the injustice by waiving the charges.

Summary: The Council (which commissioned the care provider) investigated Mr Z’s complaint about poor care for his elderly mother Mrs B properly. There is no evidence that fault caused injustice to Mrs B.

Summary: The Council delayed assessing Mrs B’s mobility needs. Following the assessment, the Council caused delay in providing the required aids and equipment, and ramp to the property. Mrs B struggled at home and felt isolated, she felt no choice but to move out to improve the mental wellbeing of her and her husband. Mrs B feels frustrated at the length of time it took to get the necessary assistance. The Council has accepted the Ombudsman’s recommendations; it will apologise, pay £250 and consider how to improve its service for future users.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the way the Council communicated with her regarding safeguarding referrals it received in 2018 and 2019. This is because Ms B has now received the information she wants and the Ombudsman could achieve no more even if he investigated. The Ombudsman is satisfied the Council has remedied the injustice caused to Ms B by its actions.

Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s handling of an application for a Disabled Facilities Grant. A different council had previously given provisional approval to the grant, but the Council then concluded the complainant was not financially eligible, and there is no fault in its decision. There was a significant delay in the Council’s response to the complaint, however, for which it has agreed to apologise. The Council has also agreed to ensure its home improvement agency’s complaints procedure is explained on its website.

Summary: The Ombudsmen find Tees, Esk & Wear Valley NHS Foundation Trust and Durham County Council’s integrated care team did not confirm why it stopped home visits to Ms Y in writing. However, there was no injustice to Ms Y. The Ombudsmen find the integrated care team did not consistently follow Ms Y’s reasonable adjustments when writing to her, which caused her distress. The integrated care team’s communication was clear about Ms Y’s care and support.

Summary: Ms X complains the Council placed her in a care home, even though she did not belong there, and failed to subsequently move her to more appropriate accommodation. The Ombudsman found fault with the way in which the Council carried out some if its mental capacity assessments. As such, the Council has agreed to review this and share the lessons learned with its staff in adult social care.

Summary: Mr Z complains on Miss X’s behalf of fault by the Council in charging for care after her assets fell below the threshold of £23,250. The Council took too long to carry out a financial assessment and caused Mr Z time and trouble in pursuing repayment of a large sum of money, as well as making both of them fearful that she would be evicted from a care home. It will apologise to both Mr Z and s Mis X and pay them a total of £1250 for the distress caused by fault.

Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed setting up the arrangement when it took over managing his finances, so he continued to receive bills and it did not set up his white goods insurance. The Council was not at fault. It has acted appropriately as Mr X’s appointee to agree a budget with Mr X, to ensure his bills were paid and to ensure Mr X no longer receives bills from his suppliers.

Summary: Ms C complains about the process through which the Council informed her about charges in relation to her mother’s temporary residential care. The Ombudsman found fault with regards to the Council’s actions. The Council’s offer to waive Mrs M’s temporary care home fees and pay a financial remedy for any distress, is a sufficient remedy for any injustice Mrs M and her family suffered.

Summary: Mrs B complains that the Council issued her with a backdated large bill for contributions towards social care services, without having appropriately informed her about liability for such charges. The Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council in this matter. The Council has agreed to waive the bill and to apologise to Mrs B for the injustice caused her by the fault. That is a satisfactory remedy.

Summary: On behalf of Mrs A, Mr X complains the Council has not properly taken into account Mrs A’s financial and personal circumstances in deciding how much she should contribute to her care costs. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Mr X complains via his mother, Mrs Z, of failings by the Council in his care and of delays in allocating a social worker and applying to the court of protection for a deputy to administer his finances. There was no fault by the Council in meeting Mr X’s care needs, but that there was delay in arranging an occupational therapy assessment, allocating a social worker, and approaching the court of protection. It is not possible to say if the outcome for Mr X would have been better with an occupational therapy assessment, but Mrs Z has had a loss of opportunity and unnecessary time and trouble, as well as having to meet some of Mr X’s expenses out of her own pocket. The Council will apologise, pay Mrs Z £500, and take action to ensure she is not out of pocket because of the fault found.

Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not provided proper care and support for his brother, Mr D. Mr B says the Council’s failure to provide enough support has put his family under physical and emotional strain. The Ombudsman has found fault with the Council causing injustice to Mr D and his family. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy this injustice.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s care and support needs. This is because parts of the complaint are outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find fault with the remaining issues complained about.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s financial assessment of a service user living in Mrs Q’s care home. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Summary: Mrs X complains about how the Council replaced her broken stairlift. Mrs X says issues in replacing the lift caused her significant distress and harmed her health. The Council is at fault, including for delays in fitting the stairlift and meeting Mrs X’s needs. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mrs X and remind staff of the procedure for Disabled Facilities Grants.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council. This is because the Council has offered Mr B a reasonable explanation for closing his case and has offered him further information on how to request support in future.

Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. Some of her complaints are out of time and we are also unlikely to find fault with others.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr and Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s decision to review and reassess their son’s, Mr C’s, care needs and support plan. This is because it is unlikely he would find evidence of fault with the Council’s decision to reassess Mr B.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his father, Mr C should have been assessed for NHS Continuing Health Care (CHC) funding when he was discharged from hospital. This is because Mr B can ask the NHS to undertake a retrospective CHC assessment if he believes Mr C has been in receipt of nursing care it should have funded.

Summary: Mrs T complains about the Council’s decision to stop day centre provision for her adult son following his move to a residential care home. She also says the Council took over his finances without notifying or consulting her, failed to issue invoices in respect of his contribution towards the cost of his care and failed to respond to her correspondence or keep her informed. The Ombudsman finds no fault on the Council’s part.

Summary: Mrs X complains her mother incurred unnecessary residential care home fees as the Council failed to explain all options for her care and the packages available to her. Mrs X also complains the Council wrongly treated Mrs Y as having capacity to make decisions about her care. The failure to provide full and accurate information regarding Mrs Y’s eligibility for financial assistance with her care amounts to fault. As does the failure to carry out a mental capacity assessment at the outset. These faults have caused Mrs Y an injustice as she has paid more for her care than was necessary.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to charge her mother for her care and support. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the care Mr X received in his care home before he was hospitalised. This is because the matter has been considered by a coroner at an inquest and further investigation by us is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: Ms X complains about the behaviour of a Council officer towards her. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault.

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about the treatment of residents in connection with their accommodation. This is because complaints about Mr B’s accommodation provider are for the Housing Ombudsman to consider.