A pensioner with severe learning disabilities who was a victim of one of the most notorious care home abuse scandals of recent years has been told he faces eviction over a dispute about who pays for the costs of his state-funded care.
The family of Hugh Kirsch, 66, said they had been warned he would have to leave his supported home because the council that funds his care refused to increase fees in line with costs and his care provider could no longer afford to subsidise the price.
The case is one of agrowing wave of evictionsof vulnerable residents caused by the crisis in adult social care funding in which hundreds of contract disputes erupt between cash-strapped councils and financially struggling care providers.
Kirsch’s sister Oona Herzberg said he was “trapped in the crosshairs of funding issues that have nothing to do with him”, and urged his funder, Haringey council, to fulfil its responsibilities to meet his care needs.
She told the Guardian: “It would be cruel and inhuman to evict Hughie. He would be traumatised after what he has been though, and so would we. He would be totally bewildered and upset, and would withdraw inside himself.”
Kirsch, who is non-verbal and needs one-to-one care, survived a regime of abuse at his previous residential home,run by the National Autistic Society, in which he and fellow residents wererepeatedly taunted, bullied and humiliatedby a “gang of controlling male staff”.
An official inquiry intothe scandal at Mendip Housepublished in 2018 found residents were slapped, had food thrown at them, were forced to eat chillies, thrown in a swimming pool and had money stolen by staff.
His family said he has been living happily for the past nine years in a home supported by not-for-profit provider Somerset Care. Herzberg described it as a “forever home” for her brother where his carers were “like family”.
It is understood that Somerset Care’s contract discussions with Haringey council broke down after the council repeatedly refused to increase its care fees in line with basic costs, which had been inflated by rises in the minimum wage and national insurance (NI).
Haringey council confirmed it had offered a 0% fee increase for 2025-26 but insisted “no decisions” had been taken on Kirsch’s care package and that the fee increase it would apply in this case was still under review.
A Haringey council spokesperson said: “We are dedicated to supporting our residents and ensuring they receive the necessary care. As part of this, we always work collaboratively with our providers to ensure a suitable and sustainable solution that prioritises the wellbeing of residents, and this case is no exception.”
Somerset Care declined to comment.
Kari Gerstheimer, the chief executive of theAccess Social Carecharity, which offers legal advice for people with social care needs, said councils had a legal duty to meet the assessed and eligible social care needs of people for whom they were responsible.
“Our legal casework indicates that, too often, cash-strapped local authorities are failing to act lawfully, prevaricating, delaying, and leaving social care providers to pick up the bill,” she said.
She added: “Some providers have not seen an uplift in hourly rates for nearly a decade, despite dramatic increases in costs associated with uplifts in the minimum wage and inflation.”
Asurvey of learning disability and autism care providerspublished in January found many were on the brink financially as they struggled to remain viable in the face of councils’ refusal or inability to increase fees to meet the rising cost of services.
Local authorities received a 3.2% funding increase for 2025-26, while care provider costs typically rose to 9% as the national living wage increased by 6.7%, and NI wage thresholds were lowered. Several councils are understood to have made across-the-board 0% fee rise offers.