Title: Strategic Response Plan to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) for Care-Linked Businesses in Rutland & Leicestershire , We Company Mismoosh ltd are giving this temple away for free. Gifts are welcome
Date: July 2025 Please note that you will have to adjust certain data.
1. Executive Summary
This document provides a comprehensive strategy for your Company ., responding on behalf of healthcare companies in Rutland and Leicestershire in response to the ongoing Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and Devolution plans affecting Rutland, Leicestershire, and potentially Peterborough. It includes legal analysis, redundancy safeguards, care funding implications, contingency planning, and stakeholder engagement approaches.
2. Immediate Engagement Strategies
2.1 Stakeholder Communication
- Targeted Councils: Rutland County Council, Leicestershire County Council, Peterborough City Council.
- Engagement Method:
- Formal letters requesting care funding continuity details.
- Participation in Local Engagement Events (Q4 2025 onwards).
- Regular contact with LGR transition teams.
- Representation:
- Nominate a staff liaison and legal advisor.
- Submit business impact statements by September 2025, detailing projected financial and operational risks from delayed funding, staff impacts, changes in commissioning pathways, and continuity barriers related to reorganised authority structures. These should include quantifiable data and evidence of attempted mitigation, and will support future compensation claims or legal defences if care is disrupted.
2.2 Government Contact
- Contact MHCLG (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities) directly.
- Point of Contact: Alex Jarvis (Interim Plans Feedback Coordination).
- Formal Requests to Include:
-
- Clarification on Transitional Care Funding:
- Whether existing care contracts funded by Rutland, Leicestershire, and Peterborough will be honored in full under the new unitary structure.
- Timeline and mechanism for interim payments during the shadow council phase (2026–2028).
- Legal commitment to continuity under the Care Act 2014, Section 48, and how this obligation will be delegated or centralized.
- Specific provisions for business-as-usual commissioning to avoid service interruption.
-
- Legislative Provisions for Health and Social Care Integration:
- Details on any draft statutory instruments or guidance documents pursuant to the Health and Social Care Act 2012 and its interplay with new local governance.
- Clarification on how Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) will be incorporated within new council structures.
- Any transition guidelines on the transfer of care eligibility frameworks and assessment systems.
- Timeline and scope of public consultation on these legislative elements.
- Supporting Note: These requests should be delivered with legal reference to:
- Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (regarding service continuity).
- TUPE 2006 (for employment conditions under transferred authorities).
- Local Government Act 2000 and 2007 (in context of reorganising executive and service functions).
- Objective: To obtain written guidance ensuring uninterrupted commissioning and funding for vulnerable care recipients, and to protect the business continuity of service providers such as YOUR COMPANY NAME, responding on behalf of healthcare companies in Rutland and Leicestershire.
3. Legal Provisions: Redundancy and Care Funding
3.1 Redundancy Law Overview (UK)
- Minimum Consultation Requirements:
- 20+ redundancies within 90 days: 30-day consultation.
- 100+: 45-day consultation.
- Fair Dismissal Requirements:
- Demonstrable financial/economic need.
- Proper selection process.
- Alternative role consideration.
- Statutory Redundancy Pay:
- 2 years+ employment: Eligible.
- Calculated by age, weekly pay (capped at £644/wk), and length of service.
3.2 TUPE Considerations
- If contracts or staff transfer under new unitary authority, TUPE regulations apply.
- YOUR COMPANY NAME must maintain current pay/conditions unless renegotiated post-transfer.
3.3 Care Plan Continuity Obligations
- Health and Social Care Act 2012:
- Local authorities responsible for person-centred care continuity.
- Statutory obligation to ensure providers do not default due to reorganisation.
- Care Act 2014:
- Commissioning must consider continuity and integration of services.
3.4 Legal Memorandum: Council Reorganisation and Commercial Care Provider Rights
Purpose
This memorandum outlines legal protections and risks for YOUR COMPANY NAME, responding on behalf of healthcare companies in Rutland and Leicestershire as a registered care-linked commercial provider during the transition to new unitary authorities.
1. Contractual Continuity
- Under public procurement law and judicial review principles, any unilateral termination of valid care contracts must be legally justified.
- Local authorities transitioning to unitary status must uphold continuity provisions unless terminated with due notice and in accordance with contractual exit clauses.
2. Administrative Law Remedies
- If funding delays or service failures occur due to council negligence during transition, YOUR COMPANY NAME may pursue:
- Judicial review of funding decisions.
- Ombudsman complaints for maladministration.
- Breach of statutory duty claims under the Care Act 2014 or Children and Families Act 2014.
3. Employee Protections
- TUPE Regulations 2006 will apply if services are transferred to a different public authority structure.
- Staff must be informed and consulted.
- Contracts of employment must transfer with all rights and liabilities.
4. Commissioning Realignment Risk
- Risk that contracts will be put out to re-tender.
- Mitigation: Request early commissioning guidelines from shadow councils.
- Leverage business continuity obligations under section 48 of the Care Act 2014.
5. Contractual Safeguards
- Recommend inserting an addendum in care delivery agreements that includes:
- Force majeure provisions linked to political reorganisation.
- Clauses mandating at least 90-day notice prior to contract change.
3.5 Legal Entitlement to Compensation for Service Interruption
If YOUR COMPANY NAME, responding on behalf of healthcare companies in Rutland and Leicestershire, is unable to deliver care due to local authority reorganisation and associated funding disruption, legal remedies may include:
- Referral to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to document that service interruption has occurred due to external state or council-led failure, not provider malpractice. The CQC is empowered to review whether a provider has taken all reasonable steps to deliver care despite external constraints.
- Proactive notification to CQC under Regulation 18 (Notification of Other Incidents) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, including evidence of correspondence with councils, MHCLG, and Integrated Care Boards.
- Legal Benefit: This regulatory disclosure can form a statutory defence against enforcement actions by showing that the cause of failure was local authority retraction of funding, not operational mismanagement by the provider.
- Claim for breach of statutory duty (Care Act 2014, s.5, s.48): Councils must ensure continuity and sustainability of care markets. If reorganisation results in interruption or collapse of provision, damages may be sought.
- Contractual damages under existing council agreements if funding is withdrawn prematurely or altered without due notice.
- Judicial review for irrational or unfair funding decisions taken during the reorganisation transition.
- Procurement law challenge if re-tendering or service allocation is conducted unfairly or without due consultation.
- Article 8 ECHR claim (via clients): Service disruption that interferes with the private life of vulnerable clients without proportional justification may result in legal actions where the provider can be named as an interested party.
Recommended Action:
- Serve a formal letter of intent to claim compensation in the event of care service disruption.
- Monitor council consultations and legal notices for any breach of continuity obligations.
- Consult with legal counsel to prepare pre-action protocols by Q4 2025.
4. Risk Mitigation and Regulatory Positioning
4.1 CQC Safeguarding through Notification and Disclosure
- Pre-register risk with the CQC through a Regulation 18 notification letter.
- Clearly document that any potential care failure would be the result of local authority funding retraction, not provider mismanagement, by:
- Including all relevant correspondence with the funding councils.
- Providing financial impact assessments.
- Detailing steps taken to avoid disruption (e.g., staff retained, interim measures attempted).
- Submitting these as part of the Regulation 18 disclosure.
- Maintain a compliance log detailing:
- All correspondence with councils and MHCLG.
- Internal impact assessments and funding forecasts.
- Measures taken to sustain service delivery.
4.2 Public Interest Defence if Investigated by CQC
- Under the Health and Social Care Act 2008, the CQC considers due diligence and mitigation in enforcement.
- Demonstrating early engagement and attempted resolution with councils may mitigate regulatory outcomes or redirect CQC scrutiny onto commissioning authorities.
4.3 Council Liability and Force Majeure Clauses
- Ensure contracts with local authorities include:
- Force majeure clauses explicitly referencing local government reorganisation as an uncontrollable event.
- Wording that withdrawal of funding may cause contractual non-performance through no fault of the provider.
Sample Clause:
“Neither party shall be liable for failure or delay in performance of its obligations under this agreement if such failure or delay results from acts, events, omissions or accidents beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to … changes in law or regulation, failure of a public authority to provide required commissioning or funding support, or the restructuring, abolition or merger of any local authority responsible for commissioning health or social care services.”
4.4 Collective Legal and Political Action
- Coordinate with other care providers to:
- Submit joint representations to councils and MHCLG.
- Consider forming a legal challenge consortium if statutory duties are breached.
- Engage MPs and media on the disruption risk to vulnerable communities.
Legal Basis Summary:
| Action | Legal Grounds |
| Joint Representations | Administrative Law – Consultation duty, Legitimate expectation |
| Legal Consortium | Care Act 2014 (s.5, s.48), Judicial Review, Breach of Statutory Duty |
| Media / MPs | Public law accountability; oversight via Parliament and press |
Recommended Implementation Steps:
- Form Provider Network: Reach out to regional care providers.
- Draft Joint Letters: Highlight funding threats, care continuity risk, and call for clarity.
- Legal Counsel Review: Have joint letter and consortium terms reviewed.
- Escalate via MPs/Media: Identify relevant MPs; prepare press briefings; share case studies.
- Monitor Council Action: Track council documents, consultations, legal compliance.
Appendix D: Advocacy Documents
D1. Joint Representation Letter (Template)
To: MHCLG Transition Care Coordination Office
Cc: Rutland CC, Leicestershire CC, Peterborough CC Transition Teams
From: Care Providers of Rutland, Leicestershire, and Peterborough
Date: [Insert Date]
Subject: Joint Representation on Funding and Commissioning Continuity Amid Local Government Reorganisation (LGR)
We, the undersigned care providers operating across Rutland, Leicestershire, and Peterborough, urgently request formal clarification and assurance regarding the continuity of care commissioning, transitional funding, and staff protections during and after the implementation of the new unitary authority structure proposed under the Local Government Reorganisation framework.
As regulated service providers under the Care Act 2014 and subject to oversight by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), we are obliged to ensure uninterrupted care to some of the most vulnerable individuals in our region. Without written clarity and protective legal mechanisms from both national and local government, this continuity is at risk due to:
- Delays in budget approvals or commissioning pathways post-reorganisation;
- Risk of TUPE complications without funding alignment;
- Uncertainty over contract validity across new authorities;
- Absence of statutory guidance on shadow authority arrangements.
We therefore request the following by no later than [Insert Reasonable Date]:
- Written guidance confirming that all current care contracts will be recognised and funded during the transition.
- A framework for interim payment mechanisms to ensure continuity of funding and service delivery.
- Clarification on how responsibilities under the Care Act 2014 and Children and Families Act 2014 will be maintained and audited.
- Formal stakeholder engagement prior to commissioning system redesign.
We reserve the right to initiate collective legal remedies should service disruptions arise due to administrative omissions or statutory non-compliance during LGR.
Sincerely,
[Insert Provider Signatories and Company Stamps]
D2. MP/Media Engagement Guidance
Objective: To elevate public and parliamentary awareness of risks to care continuity caused by LGR and secure political pressure for protective measures.
Recommended MPs to Contact: – Alicia Kearns MP (Rutland and Melton) – Edward Argar MP (Charnwood) – Dr Luke Evans MP (Bosworth) – Paul Bristow MP (Peterborough)
Engagement Method: – Send individualised letters outlining care funding disruption risk. – Request constituency meeting or Q&A. – Encourage MP to raise a Parliamentary Question (PQ) or Early Day Motion (EDM).
Sample Outreach Letter:
Subject: Urgent Request for Parliamentary Support – Safeguarding Social Care During Council Reorganisation
Dear [MP Name],
I am writing on behalf of YOUR COMPANY NAME and a network of local care providers operating in your constituency. As you may know, the Local Government Reorganisation affecting Rutland, Leicestershire, and Peterborough risks interrupting vital care services unless urgent funding guarantees and commissioning clarity are secured.
We respectfully ask that you raise this matter in Parliament and seek a ministerial response from DLUHC and DHSC on:
- How the government will ensure contractual care continuity;
- Whether interim payments will be established to bridge transition gaps;
- What protections are in place under the Care Act 2014.
We are happy to provide a full business impact assessment and meet your team at your earliest convenience.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name / Title / Organisation]
Press Briefing Tips: – Emphasise the non-political, service-user focus. – Use real examples (anonymised) to humanise the risk. – Highlight proactive measures taken (e.g., Regulation 18 notification). – Avoid blaming councils directly—focus on structural and funding uncertainties.
Suggested Media Outlets: – BBC East Midlands – Leicester Mercury – Rutland & Stamford Mercury – Care Management Matters (CMM) – The Guardian Society section
D3. Press Release (Tamplete)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: [Insert date]
Contact: [Insert media contact name and phone/email]
Organisation: YOUR COMPANY NAME (on behalf of care providers in Rutland and Leicestershire)
PRESS RELEASE
Care and Health Providers Warn of Disruption as Local Government Reorganisation Risks Funding Breakdown
Rutland / Leicestershire — A coalition of independent care providers has issued a stark warning to councils and national authorities that essential adult and youth care services across Rutland, Leicestershire, and Peterborough may face serious disruption if Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) plans are not backed by urgent funding guarantees and commissioning clarity.
The providers — represented and free support by YOUR COMPANY NAME — support hundreds of vulnerable residents and employ significant numbers of local care staff. They fear that the transitional phase toward new unitary council structures in 2026 will cause:
- Delayed or cancelled care payments,
- Redundancy risks for frontline staff, and
- Breaches of statutory care obligations under the Care Act 2014.
“We’re asking councils and the Department for Levelling Up to confirm, in writing, how they plan to safeguard care continuity during this unprecedented reorganisation,” said [Spokesperson], Director of YOUR COMPANY NAME.
“If this isn’t handled legally and financially, providers will collapse through no fault of their own — and the vulnerable will suffer first.”
We ask all Providers send in a joint representation letter to central government (MHCLG) and are calling on MPs, including Alicia Kearns (Rutland & Melton) and Edward Argar (Charnwood), to raise the issue in Parliament.
The group also confirmed that Regulation 18 notifications have been submitted to the Care Quality Commission (CQC), documenting the risk of failure due to state-caused funding interruption, not provider negligence. Legal guidance suggests councils may face judicial review or breach-of-duty claims if they fail to maintain care market continuity.
Key Demands:
- Written assurance that existing care contracts will be honoured.
- Interim payment framework to avoid delays during LGR transition.
- Inclusion of provider voices in commissioning redesign.
- Force majeure protection in care agreements referencing council restructuring.
Media Enquiries:
[Name]
[Phone]
[Email]
[Website]
- #LocalGovReform
- #DevolutionWatch
- #LGR2025
- #PublicDuty
- #AccountabilityMatters
- #LocalGovReform
- #DevolutionWatch
- #LGR2025
- #PublicDuty
- #AccountabilityMatters
- #CareCrisis
- #SocialCareUK
- #CareContinuity
- #ProtectOurCare
- #SaveOurServices
- #RightToCare
- #LegalRights
- #CareAct2014
- #TUPERights
- #RutlandCare
- #LeicestershireCa
- #PeterboroughProviders
#MidlandsCareCoalition
