Extra Care Housing and Charges

todifor

Apologise in advance for this long post.

I am in council extra care housing which carries an additional charge of £44.50 per person per week a contribution for wellbeing charges.  This means a couple are paying £89 per week. 

After I moved in end of October 23 I was beginning to wonder why I was paying them, the only thing I could see was I was getting 2 door knocks a day.  I am also paying £67.60 quarterly for a pendant.  Shortly after moving in I discovered that tenants had been in discussion with management of why were these charges are so high and why did they have to pay them?  After a search of what other councils were charging I found that the ones I discovered were all under £20.00 a week.  A lot of the councils did not disclose figures and my council is one of those that don't disclose this charge.

After twelve months of no updates from management, two of us decided we would take on the challenge.  

We were all told that these charges were not claimable under any benefit, however, we have discovered that a financial impact should have been carried out prior to tenancy being signed. No one has had this assessment.  This should have been carried out to ensure that we left enough money to live.  Some have struggled and as a result during the course of the year many of us have cancelled our direct debits.

We have now gone to the CEO and after the evidence we have provided we have been told to cancel our direct debits.   We believe because they have failed to carry out these financial impact assessments makes the contracts null and void?  if this is the case, should we get full refunds?

We have put this to the council who said it is highly unlikely that this will happen.  We are now awaiting the Council's decision on a way forward.

Can anyone point me in the right direction with regulations on this financial impact statement, the only place I came across it was on the Kent Fact Sheet 2.  I am assuming that they have got it spot on and which our Council should have done.   Is there a section in the Care Act regarding this?

There is also the case of Misrepresentation. They have never been honest with us what the charge was for, despite months of pressure.  We have asked for a complete breakdown on how the charge is allocated.  Unable or unwilling to provide this information.  Just say its for admin and 3 night staff so that there is 24/7 cover.

For your information there are 47 single flats and 23 double flats.  Look at all those pennies they have been receiving from the most vulnerable in society.

I would add that this last year has had, not only a financial impact on some of the tenants but, has also affected their health and caused emotional stress.  Please bear in mind that whilst this is extra care, many of the residents have varying degrees of health issues, including dementia. 

I would like to relay one couple's struggle.  They are 85/86, they moved in at the opening of the home in January 2022.  They hadn't been told about the wellbeing charge.  In June 2022 they received an invoice for over £1,000 each.  When they questioned it they were told they had to pay it. They agreed a settlement plan of £5 each per week so this means they have been paying £99 per week.  This put extreme financial pressure on them so much so that they were using their savings to survive.  In view of the savings being reduced they had a further financial assessment carried our by Welfare Rights.  This has now given them housing benefit and council tax reduction.

What surprises me is that Welfare Rights do not know about this financial impact assessment and they are still saying there are no benefits available for this charge!

Sorry its been so long.

p00hsticks

I can't work out if this is primarily a benefits or housing issue, but it certainly doesn't belong in the 'Site Feedback' section so I'm going to request the forum team to move it to wherever you are likely to get the best responses. 

todifor

Thank you.  

elsien

In the area where I work, tenants are made aware of the well-being charge when they move in. It forms part of the paperwork that they have to sign so shouldn’t come as any surprise. . And I think it was around the £43 a week mark, if I remember correctly. Private provider and not the council.

Although some people have minimal support, there is still someone there 24 seven if they are needed and in case of emergency and part of it may be to do with that as cover still has to be paid for by the housing provider. 

Not sure about any financial impact statement but in the scheme I am thinking of pretty much everyone who  lives there is on benefits and pays the charge so it would seem to be quite a high bar. 

Have to be honest, I think everyone expecting full refunds is completely unrealistic. You are paying insurance for in case extra support is needed. I presume that’s  why you moved to housing with  with care in the first place? 

Also not sure there is an obligation to give you a full breakdown of how the charges are arrived at. 

todifor

Thank you.  As you say the figure you quoted is private and they are considerably higher than council.  The fact that they told us to cancel our direct debits shouts out they know they are doing wrong.

eddddy

I'm no expert on this, but it sounds like...

• It sounds like the £44.50 weekly charge and £67.60 quarterly pendant charge are 'Personal Care Costs' - as defined in the Care Act

• So, as you say, the Council's Adult Social Care team should have done financial assessments for each resident to see if if the council should pay some or all of those care costs - or whether the resident should pay those care costs.

• But the council failed to do financial assessments. So, for the moment, they've told residents not to pay any more costs - presumably until they can get the financial assessments done.

I imagine that if they find that some residents shouldn't have paid care costs, they will refund those residents.

But if they find that some residents should have paid some/all of their care costs, there would be no refund, and I guess they might ask you to pay for the missed payments.

todifor

However, because they didn't carry out the financial impact assessments then the contract is null and void, surely?

user1977

todifor said:

However, because they didn't carry out the financial impact assessments then the contract is null and void, surely?

"Surely" based on what legal principle?

todifor

This is what I am asking.  It just seems to me that if the council have not carry out a legal requirement, ie ensuring that tenants have enough money to live on which, if they had carried out these impact assessments, they would have come across tenants who were struggling to pay, then would not the contract become null and void?  Please bear in mind that there is a varying amount of tenants who have not signed contracts, were not told there was a charge to pay, some were told it was per flat and not per person.  The information delivered to us has been appalling.  Also, they have sat on this issue for over 12 months, thus procuring more money out of us.

elsien

I’m not seeing how they can be a tenant who hasn’t signed a contract because the tenancy is the contract and that may well form part of that tenancy? 

user1977

todifor said:

This is what I am asking.  It just seems to me that if the council have not carry out a legal requirement, ie ensuring that tenants have enough money to live on which, if they had carried out these impact assessments, they would have come across tenants who were struggling to pay, then would not the contract become null and void?  Please bear in mind that there is a varying amount of tenants who have not signed contracts, were not told there was a charge to pay, some were told it was per flat and not per person.  The information delivered to us has been appalling.  Also, they have sat on this issue for over 12 months, thus procuring more money out of us.

You don't need to have signed a contract in order for a contract to exist. If you knew the services were being provided in exchange for a fee then I would say there's a contract, albeit perhaps with a dispute about what the charges ought to be. I don't see why the absence of impact assessments means you get the services for free.