Residential care

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Isle Care (Axholme) Limited (16 014 991)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 11-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Care Provider's actions caused an injustice to Ms B. The Care Provider has already apologised for the distressed caused. To minimise the risk of recurrence, relevant staff will read my final decision and the Care Provider will amend its procedures as described at paragraph 45 of this statement.

  • Signature At Hertford (Operations) Ltd (16 005 201)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 11-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsmen found a care home's incident reporting, record keeping and one-to-one care arrangements resulted in an injustice for an elderly man with dementia. The care home accepted this and took appropriate action to put matters right. This included agreeing to reimburse some of the care fees. The Ombudsmen found no fault by a Council in relation to information sharing with the care home. The Ombudsmen found no fault with a Trust's mental health nursing assessment and review, but there was fault in not requesting a psychiatric review. The Ombudsmen have recommended action to address this.

  • East Sussex County Council (16 001 646)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 10-Jul-2017

    Summary: Mr C complained the care home where his brother lived, failed to take the appropriate action when it found out that Mr B was buying knives and a replica gun. I decided to discontinue my investigation

  • ADR Care Homes Limited (16 016 531)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 07-Jul-2017

    Summary: The care home where Mr X's mother Mrs X lived did not comply with national regulations on notification of Mr X when Mrs X was ill in June 2016. The firm which owns the home should apologise for the injustice this caused him. There is insufficient evidence of the whereabouts of Mrs X's jewellery to make a finding of fault against the firm. The delay in the home telling Mr X about Mrs X's death was not so significant as to cause injustice to him. Mr X's claim for reimbursement of care home fees is a matter for him or Mrs X's executor to pursue with the NHS.

  • Kingston upon Hull City Council (17 003 887)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 07-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A's complaint about the actions of the Care Provider acting on behalf of the Council during her aunts transition from one care home to another. This is because he could not add the Care Provider's investigation or make a different finding if he investigated. It would be reasonable for Mrs A to ask the Information Commissioner's Office to consider her complaint about a breach of data.

  • Mapleford (Nursing Home) Limited (16 015 785)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 30-Jun-2017

    Summary: There is no evidence that the actions of the care provider caused injustice to Mrs X. The care provider sought medical attention appropriately. The complaint is not upheld.

  • Kent County Council (16 018 140)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 29-Jun-2017

    Summary: Ms A complains about the Council's failure to take action to move her to accommodation in Epping. There has been no fault by the Council and the Ombudsman will not pursue the complaint any further.

  • Runwood Homes plc (16 006 686)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 27-Jun-2017

    Summary: The care home provided adequate care to Mr X but his stay was unsatisfactory because the care home was unsuitable for, and could not manage, his needs and behaviour.

  • Care Homes Of Distinction Ltd (16 018 494)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 27-Jun-2017

    Summary: Mr A complains about Woodside View's role in a Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) order, which he says they knew nothing about. Care Homes of Distinction Ltd, which runs Woodside View, has been unable to provide any records to justify its actions. It needs to apologise and take action to ensure access to archived records and that its care homes do not complete DNACPR orders for GP's in future.

  • Four Seasons 2000 Limited (16 012 181)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 26-Jun-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot come to view on whether the care provider delayed in a calling an ambulance for Mr Y due to conflicting evidence. The care provider is at fault as its investigation into whether there was delay in calling an ambulance was inadequate. The care provider has agreed to remedy the injustice to Mrs X and her family as recommended.