Tweet
My Mother and my Brother are both being sued by the London Borough of Havering for Social Care costs. It was my intention to act on their behalf as Mum has Alzheimer's Disease and my Brother has some learning disability. My defense was to be as follows -
The defense to this case is, quite simply, that no proper financial assessment was ever conducted for this care package and that the defendants should not have been made liable for the monies claimed.
The first invoice received from Havering Council for this care package was in the amount of approximately £250.00 per week.
Txxxxxx Lxxxxx the defendants eldest son and brother, contacted Havering Council via email to query this as defendant Bxxxx Lxxxxxx has special educational needs and defendant Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxx has brain damage. He asked whether this invoice was correct and listed all of Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxx's income. The invoice was then cancelled and a new charge of approximately £50.00 per week was then charged. At no time did he provide expenditure figures.
The Council continued to invoice the family at this rate and refused to enter into correspondence with Txxxxx Lxxxxx over the issue citing Data Protection as their reason.
In the Summer of 2019 the family decided to terminate the care package as they were providing their Mother, Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxxx with all the care that she required and there was often little or nothing to do when the carer's arrived.
On the 19th August 2019 Bxxxx Lxxxxx, who as i have stated has special educational needs and these are quite clear when talking to him even on the telephone, received a call from a person called E S acting on behalf of Havering Council. She, fundamentally, bullied him into agreeing to pay every penny the family had in the bank to the Council on account of this supposed debt. This would have left them with no monies for food and light and heat.
Txxxxxx Lxxxxx then telephoned E S to talk to her and explain they would not be able to make the payment as it would leave them no money. He also explained to her that it was his belief that no proper financial assessment had ever taken place and that he had only ever provided a list of his Mother's income. He was told by E S that he could not say things like that about her client. He asked her to send him a copy of the financial assessment that she claimed had been filled out. She refused. However she did read him over a couple of the figures. They seemed odd. They were amounts containing odd pence. Txxxxx Lxxxxx is certain that had he filled out that form he, like most people, would have rounded the figure up to whole pounds.
It was then that the disgraceful individual that is E S started to make vile slurs. Stating to Txxxxx Lxxxxx, on several occasions, that he and Bxxxx Lxxxxx were "abusing" their Mother. At this point Txxxxx Lxxxxx terminated the telephone conversation.
Then a third conversation took place between E S and a family friend of the Lxxxxx!s in order to try and resolve thing's. It was with this family friend that the agreement to pay £100.00 per month was reached. At no point during the conversation did E S ask the family friend to pass over the phone to a family member to give her authorisation to speak on the Lxxxxx's behalf so I don't believe that the agreement is legally binding.
Alas, Bxxxx Lxxxxx, once again feeling under pressure, did set up a direct debit and one payment was made. However Txxxxx Lxxxxxx then instructed him to cancel the direct debit as the agreement was not made by us and was not legally binding. As I have previously stated we do not believe this debt is owed as no proper financial assessment has ever been carried out.
I note with interest that in article 12 of the claimants claim they refer to the second defendant responding and 28/08/2021 agreed to enter into a repayment plan. As we know this can't have happened as it is only June 2021. But I think it adds weight to our concerns over how Havering Council treats important documents such as Court papers and, in this case, financial assessments. Very slipshod indeed.
And finally, to further endorse our belief that no proper financial assessment was ever carried out by Havering Council in this case, I will state the following. Towards the end of 2020 Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxxx had another hospital admission. It was decided that, on discharge, she would be in need of a care package once more.
This time an on-line financial assessment was completed by Txxxxx Lxxxxxx. All income and expenditure and required evidence was provided. And Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxx was assessed at nil to pay. The Council did issue an invoice in error but immediately cancelled it and stated that Kxxxxxx Lxxxxxx is nil to pay (I have attached a copy of that email).
How can it be possible that she is now nil to pay after a proper assessment has been carried out yet several years ago she was liable to pay? There have been no changes in circumstances. If anything her income is now slightly higher due to annual increases in benefit! So, as I have stated, we do not believe this debt is owed as no proper financial assessment was ever conducted by Havering Council in this case.
Unfortunately i have received a letter from Romford County Court which i shall attach saying that i am not allowed to act for them and that a proper legal defense must be entered by 28th January 2022. And just to clarify it is both my Mother who has Alzheimer's and my brother who has learning disabilities who have both been summoned to court. Neither would be able to offer an coherent defense. Can anybody help please?
(Unfortunately it will not allow me to upload a copy of the court letter)
NOTE:- Have paragraphed and deleted full names mentioned above as no names in full should be mentioned. Tech Clerk!
The defense to this case is, quite simply, that no proper financial assessment was ever conducted for this care package and that the defendants should not have been made liable for the monies claimed.
The first invoice received from Havering Council for this care package was in the amount of approximately £250.00 per week.
Txxxxxx Lxxxxx the defendants eldest son and brother, contacted Havering Council via email to query this as defendant Bxxxx Lxxxxxx has special educational needs and defendant Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxx has brain damage. He asked whether this invoice was correct and listed all of Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxx's income. The invoice was then cancelled and a new charge of approximately £50.00 per week was then charged. At no time did he provide expenditure figures.
The Council continued to invoice the family at this rate and refused to enter into correspondence with Txxxxx Lxxxxx over the issue citing Data Protection as their reason.
In the Summer of 2019 the family decided to terminate the care package as they were providing their Mother, Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxxx with all the care that she required and there was often little or nothing to do when the carer's arrived.
On the 19th August 2019 Bxxxx Lxxxxx, who as i have stated has special educational needs and these are quite clear when talking to him even on the telephone, received a call from a person called E S acting on behalf of Havering Council. She, fundamentally, bullied him into agreeing to pay every penny the family had in the bank to the Council on account of this supposed debt. This would have left them with no monies for food and light and heat.
Txxxxxx Lxxxxx then telephoned E S to talk to her and explain they would not be able to make the payment as it would leave them no money. He also explained to her that it was his belief that no proper financial assessment had ever taken place and that he had only ever provided a list of his Mother's income. He was told by E S that he could not say things like that about her client. He asked her to send him a copy of the financial assessment that she claimed had been filled out. She refused. However she did read him over a couple of the figures. They seemed odd. They were amounts containing odd pence. Txxxxx Lxxxxx is certain that had he filled out that form he, like most people, would have rounded the figure up to whole pounds.
It was then that the disgraceful individual that is E S started to make vile slurs. Stating to Txxxxx Lxxxxx, on several occasions, that he and Bxxxx Lxxxxx were "abusing" their Mother. At this point Txxxxx Lxxxxx terminated the telephone conversation.
Then a third conversation took place between E S and a family friend of the Lxxxxx!s in order to try and resolve thing's. It was with this family friend that the agreement to pay £100.00 per month was reached. At no point during the conversation did E S ask the family friend to pass over the phone to a family member to give her authorisation to speak on the Lxxxxx's behalf so I don't believe that the agreement is legally binding.
Alas, Bxxxx Lxxxxx, once again feeling under pressure, did set up a direct debit and one payment was made. However Txxxxx Lxxxxxx then instructed him to cancel the direct debit as the agreement was not made by us and was not legally binding. As I have previously stated we do not believe this debt is owed as no proper financial assessment has ever been carried out.
I note with interest that in article 12 of the claimants claim they refer to the second defendant responding and 28/08/2021 agreed to enter into a repayment plan. As we know this can't have happened as it is only June 2021. But I think it adds weight to our concerns over how Havering Council treats important documents such as Court papers and, in this case, financial assessments. Very slipshod indeed.
And finally, to further endorse our belief that no proper financial assessment was ever carried out by Havering Council in this case, I will state the following. Towards the end of 2020 Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxxx had another hospital admission. It was decided that, on discharge, she would be in need of a care package once more.
This time an on-line financial assessment was completed by Txxxxx Lxxxxxx. All income and expenditure and required evidence was provided. And Kxxxxxxx Lxxxxx was assessed at nil to pay. The Council did issue an invoice in error but immediately cancelled it and stated that Kxxxxxx Lxxxxxx is nil to pay (I have attached a copy of that email).
How can it be possible that she is now nil to pay after a proper assessment has been carried out yet several years ago she was liable to pay? There have been no changes in circumstances. If anything her income is now slightly higher due to annual increases in benefit! So, as I have stated, we do not believe this debt is owed as no proper financial assessment was ever conducted by Havering Council in this case.
Unfortunately i have received a letter from Romford County Court which i shall attach saying that i am not allowed to act for them and that a proper legal defense must be entered by 28th January 2022. And just to clarify it is both my Mother who has Alzheimer's and my brother who has learning disabilities who have both been summoned to court. Neither would be able to offer an coherent defense. Can anybody help please?
(Unfortunately it will not allow me to upload a copy of the court letter)
NOTE:- Have paragraphed and deleted full names mentioned above as no names in full should be mentioned. Tech Clerk!
Comment