Dementia patient's fees deemed 'unfair' and must be repaid by council
A council in south London has been found to have unfairly charged a man with dementia nearly £6,500 in interest and legal fees when he failed to reply to requests for payment of his care.Lambeth Council has been told by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman that it must improve its working practices after failing to consider the man had dementia, before he passed away.The council has also been ordered to apologise to the man's daughter and pay back the fees as well as an additional £300 for the distress caused.A spokesperson for the council said they fully accept the findings and had acted on the ombudsman's recommendations.
The ombudsman said the council had failed to communicate with the man, called Mr Y in its report, about the charges for his care until late 2022, by which time there was a "significant" debt worth £32,813.32. The council said it did not have a policy on charging interest and legal fees on overdue charges for adult social care, and that it referred debts to solicitors to progress debt recovery on its behalf.The ombudsman's investigation concluded the actions of both the council and the solicitors were at fault and recommended introducing policies and procedures on charging these costs when it comes to unpaid care charges.A spokesperson for Lambeth Council said it was committed to providing the "best service possible for all of its residents" and that it worked hard to resolve problems quickly and fairly whenever they arose."We are determined to learn from this and improve how we communicate with residents about care charges. "We regret that our service fell short in this case and remain committed to working with residents and the ombudsman to improve our services going forward."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Violent pornography showing strangulation to be banned
Strangulation in pornography will be banned after a review warned violent depictions have effectively established choking as a 'sexual norm'. The government has announced plans to make any pornography showing strangulation illegal as part of their pledge to tackle violence against women and girls. It is already a criminal offence to possess porn depicting life-threatening acts, such as graphic strangulation. But the government is set to tighten up laws, warning 'dangerous online material is perpetuating the growing epidemic of violence against women and girls'. It comes after the Independent Porn Review, conducted by Baroness Gabby Bertin, found that media sources have normalised such acts and created a belief that choking a partner during sex is safe because it is non-fatal. Announcing the changes, minister for victims and tackling Violence Against Women and Girls, Alex Davies-Jones, said: 'Depicting strangulation during sex is not only dangerous, but also degrading, with real lifeconsequences for women. 'Cracking down on the appalling rise of strangulation pornography will protect women and send a clear signal to men and boys that misogyny will not be tolerated.' The move was welcomed by Andrea Simon, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition (EVAW), who says experts have 'long warned' of the dangers of normalising violence against women in online content. 'There is no such thing as safe strangulation; women cannot consent to the long-term harm it can cause, including impaired cognitive functioning and memory,' she said. 'Its widespread portrayal in porn is fuelling dangerous behaviours, particularly among young people. 'This is a vital step towards recognising the role violent pornography plays in shaping attitudes to women and regulating an industry which promotes and profits from violence against women. The UK's flagship Online Safety Act must now be updated to ensure online platforms are made to remove this content.'
Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer should quit over grooming gang scandal, says survivor
Sir Keir Starmer should quit as Prime Minister over his failings around the grooming gang scandal, a campaigning survivor has said. Sammy Woodhouse, who helped expose the Rotherham abuse scandal, said she was disgusted by Sir Keir's conduct in recent months, adding that any politician who had rejected calls for a national inquiry should resign. Ms Woodhouse was just 14 years old when she was groomed and raped by 24-year-old Arshad Hussain, who was the leader of a child exploitation gang. She eventually spoke about her ordeal publicly and her testimony helped bring about Prof Jay's inquiry, which revealed that at least 1,400 children had been abused in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013. Her abuser was later jailed for 35 years and she became a leading campaigner fighting to expose the national grooming gang scandal. Speaking to the Planet Normal podcast, Ms Woodhouse told Allison Pearson of her anger at the way the Prime Minister had initially dismissed the need for a national inquiry and had accused those in support of jumping on a far-Right bandwagon. She said: 'Well, I'm not far-Right and I'm not jumping on a bandwagon. He is just a coward. At the end of the day we're talking about children being groomed, abused, raped, tortured, trafficked, murdered, impregnated, criminalised. 'We are talking about the most heinous crimes that could ever happen, and he wants to just throw these stupid comments in, that we're far-Right and racist, it's absolutely disgusting. 'I don't think he should be prime minister. People are asking me: 'Do you want an apology from him?' Well, no, I don't want an apology. I want a resignation. 'All these politicians that voted no to an inquiry should not be politicians. It's absolutely disgusting that they still are. I think they've just shown their true colours.' Ms Woodhouse said her abuser and rapist believed he was untouchable because people in authority were frightened of being perceived as racist or Islamophobic. She said: 'I was never treated as a victim. I was treated as his mistress, as his girlfriend, and as though, you know, the whole thing was consensual. 'Pretty much all the children were treated like that. If you look at my files, he was invited to medical appointments.' She said: 'In my own files it shows that an anti-racism coordinator was actually attending my meetings.' She also alleged that one of the police officers investigating her case – who was later killed – had bought drugs from her abuser. Ms Woodhouse told the podcast that the Government should ensure that any convicted rapists or child abusers who hold dual citizenship are deported once they have served their sentence. She said: 'I think we have a very weak government, and we have people – and I think it's probably worse now than what it was back in my day, as a child – that don't want to upset the Pakistani Muslim community. 'Now, I don't care what race you are, what religion you are, what gender you are, if you are raping children, you should be prosecuted. And if you're not from this country, get 'em out.'
Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Pro-Palestine thugs are becoming a threat to democracy
If you want to understand the mentality of 21st-century Leftists, you need to read a writer who died decades before they were born. Aldous Huxley is best known as the author of the dystopian novel Brave New World. But, in my view, his most chillingly brilliant lines are to be found in a foreword he supplied for an edition of Samuel Butler's Erewhon, in 1933. 'The surest way to work up a crusade in favour of some good cause,' wrote Huxley, 'is to promise people that they will have a chance of maltreating someone… To be able to destroy with a good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behaviour 'righteous indignation' – this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats.' I remember those words every time I read about the gleeful cruelty of modern progressive 'activists'. Such as the anti-Israel protesters who have taken to targeting Luke Charters, the Labour MP for York Outer. Last week, Mr Charters has revealed, a group of masked thugs flung a tin of baked beans at him in the street, while chanting, 'Labour, Labour, genocide.' Then, on Saturday, around 20 of them tried to block the entrance to his constituency surgery, while bellowing, 'Luke Charters, you can't hide, we charge you with genocide.' As a result, he says, several constituents were too scared to attend meetings they'd arranged with him. What on earth could possess someone to think it's acceptable to hurl a tin at an MP (or, indeed, anyone?). Huxley knew. These foaming narcissists clearly believe that their cause is so unimpeachably righteous, they're entitled to bully anyone who doesn't share their fanaticism. And they do it with the most jubilant relish. Of course, Mr Charters isn't the only MP to be plagued by such people. One night in February last year, a mob of anti-Israel protesters angrily demonstrated outside the family home of the then Tory MP Tobias Ellwood. And last July, the Labour MP Rushanara Ali said that during the election campaign she'd 'spent as much time talking to the police and responding to threats and hostilities as I did talking to voters'. Certain groups, she said, had been 'weaponising' what she called 'legitimate anger about what's happening' in Gaza. Such behaviour goes far beyond 'peaceful protest'. If frenzied mobs are not only intimidating MPs, but deterring their constituents from visiting them, there can be only one conclusion. Pro-Palestinian thugs are becoming a threat to democracy. Still, I don't suppose they care. These moral treats are so delicious, they couldn't possibly give them up.
