header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 October 2009 / Ed Mitchell
Issue: 7388 / Categories: Features , Local government , Human rights , Community care
printer mail-detail

Caring matters

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
flower_4

Ed Mitchell provides an update on flawed decision making & the protection of vulnerable adults

Charging for non-residential care services can be a complex business because the amount of the charge is related not only to a person’s income but also to the way in which they live their life and spend their money.

Therefore, to rush through a charging assessment is to invite error, which is what happened in the claim for judicial review that came before the High Court (Hickinbottom J) in R(B) v Cornwall CC [2009] EWHC 491 (Admin), [2009] All ER (D) 244 (Jun).

The case revolved around “disability related expenditure” (DRE) a concept employed by the statutory charging guidance (Fairer Charging Policies for Home Care and other Non-residential Social Services, LAC (2001) 32).

DRE is important because it operates in some cases to reduce the charge that a service user has to pay. Under the guidance, DRE is subtracted from the income of a service user in receipt of disability benefits such as the care component

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll