Ealing Council has been ordered to apologise and retrain staff after the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman found five separate faults in its handling of an elderly man with Parkinson’s-related dementia. The council failed to answer emails and calls from the man’s son, delayed a crucial NHS funding assessment, and directed the family to a non-existent complaints process, the watchdog ruled.
Background: Hospital Discharge and Initial Care Package
In November 2024, the man, referred to as Mr X in the Ombudsman’s report, was discharged from hospital. Having previously lived independently, the council assessed that Mr X would now need reablement care with two carers attending four times a day. Both Mr X and his son, Mr Y, were told that this package was free for the first six weeks, after which it would become chargeable following a financial assessment.
Over the following month, Mr X’s health deteriorated, leading to three further hospital admissions. Mr Y requested that his father be given an NHS Continuing Healthcare (CHC) assessment, a free evaluation to determine if the NHS will fully fund long-term care due to a person’s needs. While the family progressed this, Mr Y also requested a change in his father’s care agency due to a lack of consistency in the carers attending his father’s home, and asked the council to assist in completing the CHC checklist.
Ombudsman Finds Multiple Faults in Council’s Response
The council continued Mr X’s care package but placed him on a waiting list for a social worker, who was assigned at the end of January 2025. The Ombudsman found fault in the delay of providing support to complete the CHC checklist. It took several weeks to assign a social worker, which held up the checklist and delayed the start of the NHS process for financial support towards his care.
In late January 2025, the six-week free care period ended. Around this time, Mr Y submitted the completed CHC checklist for assessment. While this process was taking place, Ealing Council began charging Mr X, but the watchdog found fault because the council had not first provided a written statement of how much his weekly contributions would be.
The Ombudsman also found fault with the council’s decision to put Mr Y back on a waiting list after his physical health began worsening and he required further support, on the basis that the council had not responded to Mr X’s request for a review. A further fault was identified in the council directing the family to submit a ‘stage 2 complaint’ about the care charges, which did not exist.
Communication Failures and Resolution
Mr Y then repeatedly tried to resolve the issues until June 2025, but the council failed to return several calls, left emails unanswered, and bounced Mr Y between several departments without a clear point of contact. The Ombudsman found this to be a fifth fault.
In July 2025, the council apologised for communication failures and partially upheld his complaint, agreeing to suspend all care invoices and debt recovery actions until the NHS made a final CHC decision. At the end of July, the NHS determined that Mr X is eligible for full backdated funding for his care, which heavily reduced any financial loss.
The Ombudsman ordered the council to apologise, pay Mr Y £150, and issue training reminders to staff. Ealing Council was contacted for comment.
