SEFTON CARE ASSOCIATION
PRESS RELEASE
May 22, 2012.
Sefton Care Association (SCA) has been told “there is
no money” to pay for the shortfall and backdating of care fees frozen by Sefton
Borough Council – in direct contravention of a High Court ruling that says “no
money is not an excuse”.
Members of SCA met with Care Minister Paul Burstow,
John Pugh MP, Sefton Borough Council Chief Executive Margaret Carney and other
officials in Westminster, but before SCA could put its case, the “there’s no
money” line was delivered.
“As soon as that was said we realised that not only
was our meeting a waste of time, but also that the situation had not been
properly researched,” said Dan Lingard of Sefton Care Association.
“As the meeting was conducted under Chatham House
Rules, we can’t say who said there was no money – but it was said nevertheless.
“Sefton Council has already defied a High Court ruling
and told care home owners and the borough’s vulnerable that it will be freezing
care fees for both 2011/12 and 2012/13, a dispute which led to SCA committee
members being invited to Westminster to discuss the issue.
“But it’s clear there was no intention of arriving at
any sort of a conclusion in that meeting which would be of any benefit to
people needing care, or care home owners and operators – especially when we
were told ‘there’s no money’.
“But what people in the meeting seemed to have lost
sight of is that the High Court ruling in November 2011 said that lack of
resources is no excuse for not fulfilling care obligations.”
In paragraph 90 of the
ruling, His Honour Judge Raynor QC, sitting as a judge of the High Court,
quoted an earlier precedent and ruling: “In paragraph 46(2) of his judgment in
the Forest Care Home case,
Hickinbottom J stated: ‘In deciding whether a person is in need of care and
accommodation, an authority is entitled to have regard to its own limited
financial resources. However, having set that threshold and found that a
particular person surpasses it, an authority is under an obligation to provide
care and accommodation in fulfilment of its section 21 obligations (under the
National Assistance 1948), which is a specific duty on the authority owed to an
individual, not a target duty: lack of resources is no excuse for
non-fulfilment of that obligation…’
“The Claimants (Sefton Care
Association) submit that the evidence in this case shows that the decision to
freeze fees was taken for budgetary reasons alone or at least to an improper
extent, without there being any attempt to balance other factors against the
need for financial savings.”
Dan Lingard said: “In other
words, no money is not an excuse – care obligations must be fulfilled, and they
are not being fulfilled by a freeze in care fees, which, given inflation and
other factors, means that not only have care fees been frozen – they’ve
actually fallen.”
Judge Raynor ruled that Sefton Council should not have
frozen 2011/2012 payment levels to elderly people in care in the borough, and
that it did not pay due regard to the actual cost of care in making its
unilateral decision. He directed Sefton Council to enter into consultation with
local care homes, and to reassess care payments for the 2011/2012 financial
year – and establish the actual cost of care by which care fee rates could be
set.
But Sefton Council not only ignored the February 9,
2012 deadline to respond, it has also said it will freeze care fees
retrospectively, and for the 2012/13 financial year as well – meaning that care
fees have been static despite the Retail Prices Index rising nearly 12% in the
three years since care fees were last increased.
Ends
For further information:
Iain Macauley 07788 978800
@SeftonCareAssn
