Northumberland County Council (17 012 868)

Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 29-May-2019

Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to properly communicate with him and failed to investigate a safeguarding referral about his brother, Mr P. However, he has now decided to withdraw his complaint. The Council has taken action that he is content with and he feels his brother’s interests are now being properly addressed.

London Borough of Bromley (18 016 388)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 29-May-2019

Summary: Mr X complained about the care provided by care agencies and the Council putting in an interim care package without telling him about it. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely an investigation by us will lead to a different result.

Warwickshire County Council (18 018 970)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 23-May-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the quality of domiciliary care for the complainant’s son. This is because the complaint is made late and is out of our jurisdiction.

Westminster City Council (18 013 814)

Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 20-May-2019

Summary: Mr X complains about poor homecare provided by Healthvision (UK) Ltd on the Council’s behalf, causing him distress. The Council and Healthvision (UK) Ltd accept there was some fault in some of the home visits. There was also a failure to keep daily record sheets and to respond to two emailed complaints. The Council will apologise for the failure to respond to the complaints and take whatever action is necessary to ensure daily records are kept. There was no fault in the other matters complained of.

Essence Homecare Limited (18 012 559)

Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 15-May-2019

Summary: Mrs X complained about the actions of two members of staff from the Care Provider. I have discontinued my investigation. The injustice Mrs X experienced is not significant enough to justify further investigation into her complaint. In any event, it is unlikely further investigation would result in a different outcome because the Care Provider has deregistered and no longer provides a service.

My Life (Carewatch) Limited (18 007 848)

Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 09-May-2019

Summary: Mrs X complains about the level of care provided to her father and, in particular, frequently missed visits. The care provider is at fault for missing calls. The caused avoidable distress to family members. It has agreed to pay Mrs X £250 for the avoidable distress caused and to waive outstanding fees of £181.

Halton Borough Council (17 018 882)

Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 07-May-2019

Summary: Mr X complains that the Council wrongly assessed Mrs Y’s finances, failed to provide adaptations and to deal effectively with his complaints about this. It also continued to provide carers after they caused injury to Mrs Y. He says this caused much anxiety, later assessments were incorrect and Mrs Y was trapped in the house and had to pay privately for adaptations. The Ombudsman found the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with Mrs Y’s finances and the quality of care it provided. It has already remedied the injustice.

Comfort Call Limited (18 019 644)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 07-May-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the care provider. This is because there is no evidence he has suffered significant personal injustice from the matter complained about.