Southend council refunding £2.3m in overcharged care fees
A council has said it will pay about £2.3m in refunds after overcharging people for the cost of care.Southend-on-Sea City Council said there was a technical error when new software was set up in 2018.A total of 586 people had been contacted already, including 335 people who still received this care, a spokesperson said."I sincerely apologise for this error," said Labour council leader Daniel Cowan.
"I am pleased to report that council officers have moved quickly to assess its impact, and we are putting things right."The council said it discovered that disability premium, enhanced disability premium and the carer premium were not factored in when new software was set up in 2018 to calculate a person's minimum income guarantee.The Care Act 2014 dictates that local authorities can charge for care, so long as these fees do not reduce an individual's income below this guarantee.This meant some people who received Personal Independence Payments or Disability Living Allowance, and some people receiving Employment and Support Allowance instead of Income Support, were overcharged.People paid too much for care in their homes; while living with family members; supported living; shared lives; extra care and day care, the council said.The spokesperson said people who had overpaid and who were not in arrears would be offered a refund or given the option of using the overpayment to cover future fees."We are confident that we now have the systems and processes in place to stop this happening again," said Cowan.
Follow Essex news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Auto Express
20 minutes ago
- Auto Express
Avoid using car finance claim firms, says financial watchdog
Consumers have been advised to steer clear of using car finance claim firms, as the UK's top financial watchdog says they could be spending money unnecessarily. The Financial Conduct Authority has begun setting out advice surrounding a possible redress scheme with regard to the ongoing car finance scandal which, according to experts, could see billions of pounds made available for potential claims. Advertisement - Article continues below However, with countless companies now popping up to assist potential claimants, the FCA is keen to remind motorists that in using one 'they may end up paying for a service they do not need and having to pay up to 30 per cent in fees out of any award they may receive'. Rather than utilise one of these paid services, consumers can submit timestamped complaints and claims themselves. Tools such as those on the MoneySavingExpert website can help people search for previous finance agreements, while the site also provides a template in order to draft a letter of complaint. With the Supreme Court set to make its judgement next month in regard to whether 'discretionary commission arrangements' (DCAs) were illegal in the first instance, the FCA is also advising finance firms on how they should calculate claims for disgruntled clients. The FCA is keen for a redress scheme to strike a balance between being fair to consumers, but at the same time not disrupting the market by putting finance firms out of business. In its latest release, the FCA says that the latter scenario could 'reduce competition and could make it more expensive for consumers to borrow money to buy a car in the future'. Such a scheme will fall under one of two arrangements: 'opt-in' and 'opt-out'. With the former – considered the most likely scenario – claimants would be required to notify their finance provider prior to a specified date if they wish to be considered for redress. 'Opt-out', on the other hand, would mean that everyone who is eligible will automatically be included, unless they contact their firm to be taken off the list. Consumers can expect the FCA to announce within six weeks of the Court's judgement in July as to whether a full redress scheme will be implemented, and how exactly it will operate. Tell us which new car you're interested in and get the very best offers from our network of over 5,500 UK dealers to compare. Let's go…
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The NHS truths the Left don't want you to hear
Until very recently, Health Secretary Wes Streeting tried to market himself as a radical health reformer, who is not afraid to poke sacred cows. While his reform-minded rhetoric always remained at a highly-abstract and general level, Streeting deserved some credit for it, because he did not have to do this. He had the courage to say things which he knew would rub some people up the wrong way, not least the Corbynite wing of his own party. Sadly, that brief period of NHS candour is now officially over. Streeting, the self-styled reformer, is no more. He and his colleagues have fully retreated into their comfort zone. During the recent local election campaign, Labour distributed a leaflet that showed a mock medical bill, and a doctor holding up a credit card reader. The message was clear: vote for us, because this is what the other lot want to do to you. On Twitter/X, Labour are now frequently posting dire warnings about the alleged evils of insurance-based healthcare systems. This is exactly that old-school NHS cultism which Streeting used to disavow until five minutes ago. It may work for him. The NHS may be falling apart, but the cult around is still going strong. In the eyes of its keenest defenders, the NHS can do no wrong. They have quietly dropped the old cliché about the NHS being 'the envy of the word', and replaced it with a slightly more subtle version, which goes something like this: Once upon a time, the NHS used to be the best healthcare system in the world. But then, from 2010 on, it was systematically defunded. It was deliberately run into the ground, so that it can be privatised more easily. A privatised system would mean luxury healthcare for the rich, and Wild West medicine for the poor. None of these claims are true. Let's have a look at each of them in turn. 'The NHS used to be the best healthcare system in the world' The NHS was never the best healthcare system in the world. The idea that it ever was can be traced back to a ranking compiled by the Commonwealth Fund, an American healthcare think tank, which relies on a very unusual methodology, in which medical outcomes only account for a fifth of the total score. This matters, because on medical outcomes, the NHS has always been one of the worst-performing healthcare systems in the developed world – as even the Commonwealth Fund study shows. There is no turning point after which the NHS's performance suddenly deteriorated. It was just never good in the first place. '…it was systematically defunded' At the end of the 2010s, age-adjusted real NHS spending per capita was only marginally higher than it had been in the beginning of the decade. Put differently, the NHS budget only just about kept pace with population growth, population ageing, and inflation. This clearly constituted a slowdown in spending increases compared to the previous decade. But it does not constitute a 'defunding'. In any case: that period of relative spending restraint is already over again. The NHS budget was given a massive boost during the pandemic, which has only been partially reversed. Public healthcare spending in the UK stands at just under 9% of GDP: one of the highest levels in the world. '…so that it can be privatised…' Conspiracy theories about secret plans to privatise the NHS have been around for decades. I wrote a report on this three years ago, for which I went through the news archives, and I found warnings about the NHS's imminent demise from every year since 1980. But somehow, it never happens. The NHS remains an unusually state-centred system. Most healthcare systems, including tax-funded ones, use a mix of public, private for-profit and private non-profit providers. 'A privatised system would mean luxury healthcare for the rich, and Wild West medicine for the poor' There are no plans – secret or otherwise – to privatise the NHS. More's the pity. Because there is nothing wrong with private healthcare systems. There are good examples of private, insurance-based healthcare systems, most notably in the Netherlands and Switzerland, which are nothing like the dreaded system of the US. These systems cover everybody: poor people are exempt from health insurance premiums and co-payments. Under these systems, rich and poor alike get faster access to medical treatment, and better medical outcomes, than they would on the NHS. The only thing these people don't get is a naff feel-good mythology around their health systems.
BBC News
30 minutes ago
- BBC News
Kent County Council Doge head quit due to 'doubt' over project
The tech entrepreneur who quit heading up Reform UK's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) says he did so because the resignation of the party's chairman left him with "a bit of doubt" about the future of the 11 months in the role, Reform UK chairman Zia Yusuf resigned on Thursday alongside Nathaniel Fried, who was said to be leading the unit. Speaking to Politics South East, Mr Fried said the outgoing chairman was "spearheading" the Doge initiative and expressed concerns that the scheme "might not turn out how I wanted it to" without councillors at Kent County Council (KCC) have said it is "business as usual" following the double resignation. KCC deputy leader Brian Collins said "absolutely nothing's changed" following the double departure."We have a focus, we have a mission, that mission hasn't changed, business as usual," he told BBC South East on Friday Mr Yusuf and Mr Fried were part of the Doge team which attended its first meeting at KCC on said the meeting was "very productive" but the party admitted it did not know how long it would take for the unit to produce scheme, modelled on the Doge unit created by billionaire Elon Musk as part of Donald Trump's second term as US president, aims to identify and eliminate wasteful to claims that the "engine room" of the unit had now been lost, Mr Collins said: "The engine room is the 57 councillors that have been elected to run this council." 'Circus coming to town' Conservative councillor Sarah Hudson described the current situation as a "mockery".She said: "It's like a circus coming to town, and then you've got various clowns, and they've thrown their toys out of the pram at the first issue that's come along."Mr Fried said he took on the project for free because he felt the "social contract between tax payers and the British government has been a little bit broken".Asked what people in Kent would make of the resignations, just four days into the project, he said he was sure they were "disappointed"."I have great confidence in the local councillors who are working very hard at the moment, especially the head of the council," he said."I'm sure that people are disappointed but thus is politics."A spokesperson for Reform UK said: "The work of the Reform UK Doge unit will continue. The team is larger than just one man."Many Reform-controlled councils already have their respective Doge cabinet members, so this work was happening before and will continue after."
