Warwickshire County Council (20 003 583)

Statement Upheld Charging 26-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council failed to offer an available and suitable nursing home within the individual’s personal budget. The individual moved to a care home above their personal budget. The Council should have covered the full cost and not asked for a top-up payment, because there was no suitable alternative. The Council will waive the top-up and apologise for its poor financial information. The Council will remind staff to clearly document the availability and suitability of care homes, provide simple and clear financial advice, and show it has met its duties under the Care Act 2014.

Cumbria County Council (19 009 173)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 26-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to assess, or review, his, his wife’s or adult son’s social care needs. The Council was not at fault in the way it offered to assess their needs.

Cherry Tree Care Limited (19 009 351)

Statement Not upheld Residential care 26-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs Y complains on behalf of her late husband, Mr Y, that Cherrytree Residential Home failed to provide the required period of notice before asking him to leave, and retained the fees paid for the following month. We find no evidence that the home asked Mr Y to leave. On the balance of probabilities, it appears more likely than not that Mrs Y chose to move Mr Y. The home was therefore entitled to retain the fee paid as the requirement to serve 28 days’ notice is made clear in the contract signed by Mrs Y.

Kent County Council (20 005 238)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 26-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr B complained the Council reduced the number of hours his son, C was entitled to on his care plan without proper consultation. Mr B says the actions of the Council have led to C becoming withdrawn and depressed and has had a harmful effect on his health. We find fault with the Council’s handling and implementation of reducing C’s agreed care hours. An injustice has been caused to both C and Mr B. To remedy the injustice the Council has agreed to apologise to C and Mr B, pay a financial remedy to both of them, review and reinstate C’s care and support hours and learn from this complaint. The Council has also agreed to review all other cases affected by similar fault.

Corner House Care Limited (20 006 782)

Statement Upheld Residential care 26-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs C complained her sister’s care home threw away her sister’s clothes after she had passed away, even though Mrs C had repeatedly told the home the family wanted to collect them. Mrs C complained the care home also failed to establish how this happened and says the whole event has caused her a lot of distress at an already very difficult time. We found fault with the actions of the care provider. While the care provider has agreed to provide an apology, it has not agreed to pay the financial remedy we recommended, which it believes to be too high. We have given the care provider 30 days to comply, before we will start the process of issuing an Adverse Finding Notice.

Wakefield City Council (20 001 690)

Statement Upheld Charging 25-Feb-2021

Summary: Mr D complains on behalf of his late mother, Mrs J, that the Council wrongly charged for her home care. The Council has accepted it did not advise Mr D properly prior to July 2018 and has already offered to waive the extra charges for the period October 2015 to May 2018. This is a suitable remedy. We have found no fault in the way the Council charged Mrs J from June 2018 to September 2019. Mr D should now pay the outstanding amount.

Regal Care Trading Ltd (20 002 828)

Statement Upheld Covid-19 25-Feb-2021

Summary: Mrs X, complains Blenheim Care Home failed to look after her father, Mr Y, properly, resulting in him spending time in hospital. Blenheim Care Home was ill equipped to deal with the demands arising from COVID-19. It failed to meet Mr Y’s needs or identify the fact he was unwell. Regal Care needs to apologise to Mrs X and pay financial redress to Mr Y.

London Borough of Islington (19 019 259)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 25-Feb-2021

Summary: The Council was at fault for the delay in its safeguarding investigation about Mrs Y. This did not result in a significant injustice as the evidence shows that Mrs Y was well looked after and happy during this delay period. We have completed our investigation.

Agincare UK Limited (19 020 058)

Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 25-Feb-2021

Summary: The care provider failed to keep records as is required. It also failed to properly investigate the complaint into this matter and to implement the recommendations made in its response. In recognition of the injustice caused by these failings we recommended the care provider refunds Mr Y’s care costs for the month prior to his death, apologises to his family, amends its procedures and reminds its staff of the conduct it expects from them. The care provider agreed.

London Borough of Lewisham (19 014 970)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 25-Feb-2021

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s actions regarding a financial assessment relating to her care provision. She says the Council did not make appropriate reasonable adjustments to take her disabilities into account and incorrectly calculated her financial contributions. Ms X says the Council’s actions led to delays in the process and caused her unnecessary distress and confusion. We find some fault in this matter and the Council has agreed a remedy to address the injustice to Ms X.