Council ordered to pay back thousands in care fees (From Daily Echo)

I think the council had better start saving up for the overtime it's staff are going to have to do with the raft of letters heading their way. I'll be sending mine today claiming about eight years worth of payments.

Yet another fine mess created by the previous Conservative administration that Labour will now have to deal with. No wonder plans for next year's budgetare in such chaotic disarray.

When will people learn that short term penny pinching - often carried out for ideological reasons without thinking through their wider implications - will store up long term problems.... and costs?

Come on Echo .... No "Quote" from Cllrs Smith or Moulton !!!!!!!

If you all read the article properly with out your it's the Tories fault glasses on this was the practice up & down the country no matter what party runs the council.
If the council/you & I provide £454 for a care home place & either the family don't like it or the person needs a specialist home why shouldn't the family help provide a place for their loved ones?
in the case of Specialist needs watching Saints & Sinners the Social services can help cover costs unless Dom's got it wrong.
better still why don't these peoples families look after their own parents like mine & my relatives did?

Lone Ranger I will give you a quote.

Previous Administration cause more hardship to family and once again failing its constituents.

Putting the ' family should care' argument to one side, is there any incentive in saving for your old age?
It would seem that that the system rewards those that have a life on benefits/spend their money, yet penalise those that have never used the benefits system in their life.

loosehead wrote:
If you all read the article properly with out your it's the Tories fault glasses on this was the practice up & down the country no matter what party runs the council.
If the council/you & I provide £454 for a care home place & either the family don't like it or the person needs a specialist home why shouldn't the family help provide a place for their loved ones?
in the case of Specialist needs watching Saints & Sinners the Social services can help cover costs unless Dom's got it wrong.
better still why don't these peoples families look after their own parents like mine & my relatives did?

I suggest t you read the story, it's not about anyone making contributions to a family members care package, it's about the last Tory administration charging to much for the care they provided.

The elderly lady or her family were charged too much by SCC, that happened under the watch Cllr Ivan White (Tory cabinet member for adult social care).

Regardless if other councils up and down the country did the same, this is a Tory led administration mess that will need to be put right by the current Labour administration, I wonder how many more Tory messes this administration needs to clean up, first the binmen, then children's social services and now adult social care.

Come on Loosehead you it's the old Tory administrations fault, I admire you for trying to defend the indefensible.

It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

Shoong wrote:
It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

Probably because Cllr Matt Stevens has more class than the previous cabinet member for Adult Social Care and all his colleagues put together.

Weather Cllr Stevens says it or not, we all know were the blame lays for this co*k up and if the boot was on the other foot I'd imagine the Comb over King screaming about it from the Civic Centre clock tower.

This will lead to even higher fees being charged by the greedy cartel of private care homes as they now know they can get away with their profiteering and the courts will back them up. Scum.

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:
It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

Probably because Cllr Matt Stevens has more class than the previous cabinet member for Adult Social Care and all his colleagues put together.

Weather Cllr Stevens says it or not, we all know were the blame lays for this co*k up and if the boot was on the other foot I'd imagine the Comb over King screaming about it from the Civic Centre clock tower.

Blame, blame , blame. I'm not sure how this helps those who were affected by this as long as they get what they are due.

Blame games rarely achieve anything in cases such as these.

Shoong wrote:
It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

You won't, Had it however been a Labour mistake you would have. Thats the 'unbiassed' Echo for you.

Inform Al wrote:

Shoong wrote:
It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

You won't, Had it however been a Labour mistake you would have. Thats the 'unbiassed' Echo for you.

In a way I like that there was no bias in the above article, of course the needs of those involved takes second place as long as you can get your pop in.

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:
It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

Probably because Cllr Matt Stevens has more class than the previous cabinet member for Adult Social Care and all his colleagues put together.

Weather Cllr Stevens says it or not, we all know were the blame lays for this co*k up and if the boot was on the other foot I'd imagine the Comb over King screaming about it from the Civic Centre clock tower.

Blame, blame , blame. I'm not sure how this helps those who were affected by this as long as they get what they are due.

Blame games rarely achieve anything in cases such as these.

Local Councillors are there to accept responsibility/blame
, that's why they stand for office, when it goes right, they quick enough to accept the praise.

All quiet on the Royston front

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:
It's odd, I can't see any kind of political points scoring on this page until it comes to Comments section.

Probably because Cllr Matt Stevens has more class than the previous cabinet member for Adult Social Care and all his colleagues put together.

Weather Cllr Stevens says it or not, we all know were the blame lays for this co*k up and if the boot was on the other foot I'd imagine the Comb over King screaming about it from the Civic Centre clock tower.

Blame, blame , blame. I'm not sure how this helps those who were affected by this as long as they get what they are due.

Blame games rarely achieve anything in cases such as these.

Local Councillors are there to accept responsibility/blame

, that's why they stand for office, when it goes right, they quick enough to accept the praise.

All quiet on the Royston front

The Royston Front? Has he formed a new political party? Can't see it working.

Of course, what has your adoption of this blame game achieved?

Not much, just a few more kilobytes of data of a political pop on a website. Nice one.

On the inside wrote:
This will lead to even higher fees being charged by the greedy cartel of private care homes as they now know they can get away with their profiteering and the courts will back them up. Scum.

Totally agree, but it must also be remembered that it was the Council itself that willingly got rid of its own care homes.

Privatisation of the provision of social care is following the same route as the earlier privatisation of the utilities.

Over the Edge wrote:

loosehead wrote:
If you all read the article properly with out your it's the Tories fault glasses on this was the practice up & down the country no matter what party runs the council.
If the council/you & I provide £454 for a care home place & either the family don't like it or the person needs a specialist home why shouldn't the family help provide a place for their loved ones?
in the case of Specialist needs watching Saints & Sinners the Social services can help cover costs unless Dom's got it wrong.
better still why don't these peoples families look after their own parents like mine & my relatives did?

I suggest t you read the story, it's not about anyone making contributions to a family members care package, it's about the last Tory administration charging to much for the care they provided.

The elderly lady or her family were charged too much by SCC, that happened under the watch Cllr Ivan White (Tory cabinet member for adult social care).

Regardless if other councils up and down the country did the same, this is a Tory led administration mess that will need to be put right by the current Labour administration, I wonder how many more Tory messes this administration needs to clean up, first the binmen, then children's social services and now adult social care.

Come on Loosehead you it's the old Tory administrations fault, I admire you for trying to defend the indefensible.

So I read it again & where in this does it say the council charge too much?
Giving evidence to the Local Government Ombudsman the woman's daughter said they could not find a place at a home at the council's “usual rate”, then £454, that met her mother's assessed needs for dementia and nursing care.

The family had to choose a home where the rates were higher, £750, but lodged a complaint when the council charged them top-up fees.
So top up fees would mean the amount over £454 wouldn't it?
My brother-in-law's dad needed round the clock care & because he & my sister were working they were looking at him going into a home but didn't like the one's they saw at £454 so they looked at more & found one which he also liked.
They would as in this case be expected to top up the council payment & were quite happy to do this as long as the father was happy & looked after.
I come from a family with 11 children so I've seen many different aspects of life so please don't try to cane me before you read the article correctly.
Clean up the bin men? how many job losses? Unions holding meetings to call for strike action? They've really sorted that one out haven't they?
protected services? Oaklands Pool.Fortnightly bin collections Yes they've sorted it!

Vonnie wrote:

On the inside wrote:
This will lead to even higher fees being charged by the greedy cartel of private care homes as they now know they can get away with their profiteering and the courts will back them up. Scum.

Totally agree, but it must also be remembered that it was the Council itself that willingly got rid of its own care homes.

Privatisation of the provision of social care is following the same route as the earlier privatisation of the utilities.

Vonnie read the article more carefully. it states that the person needed to go into a dementia care home.
My Aunty was in one which must be in Nursling or Lordshill as a lady down the road works there & I'm sure it's very close & had to either be council run or charged only what the council were paying as my two cousins couldn't afford top up fees so do people look around or make up their minds that's close to me that's not so why should I pay more to go Private?
What I'm trying to say is there are council run homes that are for dementia patients but it's the families choice of where they go.
Maybe the council should say our facility or no money?