A dad and son who were told to pay the council nearly £2,000 in just four days have had their complaint against the authority upheld.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found that Trafford Council failed to adequately explain social care costs to the elderly man and his son, who later said they did not need the level of support they were being charged for.

"Mr X" said that the council issued a care plan for his dad "F", with more visits per day than necessary at a "significant cost" for reasons he was not told. 

The Ombudsman has now reported how Mr X said that his dad would not have agreed to the care plan if the council had told him the cost, "especially as he could manage with less care". 

At one point the council billed the dad and son for £1,800 of charges and gave them just four days to pay.

“This has caused Mr X and Mr F financial distress,” the report said.

“Mr X would like the council to change its procedures and advise people correctly.”

Councils have a duty to arrange care and support for people with eligible needs and a power to meet those needs in places other than care homes, like at home. 

They can charge for non-residential care following a needs assessment, but councils must carry out a financial assessment to decide what a person can afford to pay. 

They cannot charge more than the cost incurred to meet a person’s assessed eligible needs.

In this case, Mr F fell ill and went into hospital. The council visited him in February 2023 and drafted a care plan to enable him to come home safely. It recommended carers visit Mr F four times a day.

Mr F came home in the middle of February and the care plan started.

A social care assessor emailed his son at the beginning of March confirming that they would send a letter stating if a contribution was required and how much it would be.

In the middle of June, the council completed its financial assessment, which meant Mr F would have to contribute £150 per week.

Later that month, Mr X received a letter saying Mr F was in arrears to the tune of £1,800 in care charges and said payment was due within four days. 

Responding, Mr X called the council complaining that he had been advised that his dad would only need to contribute between £5 and £10 per week.

However, the council apologised, saying this was only in relation to the telecare alarm. 

Mr X asked for a review of the assessment, saying that the council gave "wrong advice" during the financial assessment visit.

The dad complained to the Ombudsman in September. In October, Mr F moved in with Mr X, who told the Ombudsman this was to provide company for his dad who was struggling emotionally since the death of his wife.

Around the same time, Mr X asked the council to amend Mr F’s care package and it was reduced to two visits per day – costing about £130 per week.

The Ombudsman said: “In conversation with me, Mr X said his dad was mis-sold the original care package.

"Mr X said the carers were only microwaving a meal on two of the visits, which he could do for his father.

"These visits were not needed. Mr X said his father only ever really needed one visit a day, as per his current care plan.”

The council has now agreed to give Mr F until the end of the financial year to repay the outstanding amount and has apologised for a delay in carrying out the financial assessment. 

The authority has apologised to Mr F and Mr X and paid out £250 for the distress caused by "miscommunication" and failing to clarify matters in writing.

Case workers will also be reminded of the importance of providing a recording clear and detailed discussions.

A spokesperson for Trafford Council said: “As an organisation, we are continually learning from the feedback we receive from residents.

"We have apologised to Mr X and have reminded our teams of the importance of communication.

"We accept the findings of the report and note that the ombudsman found that we followed procedure throughout.”