Decision search
Your search has 379 results
-
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 16-Apr-2021
Summary: Mrs X complains about the actions of her care provider. She says the carers did not wear correct personal protective equipment, care was rushed and inadequate, care was cancelled without discussion, and that a carer falsified her timesheet. She also complains the care provider’s communication with her son was poor. We find some fault with the care provider’s actions. We have made recommendations.
-
Statement Upheld Other 13-Apr-2021
Summary: The care provider did not act promptly to report safeguarding concerns about Mr X. It failed to treat Mr X with dignity. The care provider will now take steps to review its procedures and offer a sum in recognition of the injustice suffered.
-
Sanctuary Care Limited (20 004 275)
Statement Upheld Covid-19 08-Apr-2021
Summary: Mrs X complains Sanctuary Care has failed to deal properly with family contact arrangements at Park View Residential Care Home during COVID-19, resulting in a decline in Mrs Y’s mental health and avoidable distress to herself. Sanctuary Care has not dealt with this matter properly, resulting in avoidable distress. It needs to apologise, pay financial redress and take action to prevent similar problems from arising again.
-
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 08-Apr-2021
Summary: Mrs B complained APT delayed issuing invoices. APT also delayed in responding to Mrs B’s concerns. We suggest APT take action to acknowledge the time and trouble Mrs B has spent pursuing the matter.
-
Dalemead Care Home Limited (20 001 702)
Statement Upheld Charging 08-Apr-2021
Summary: Mrs B complained about the fees Dalemead Care Home Limited charged after Ms C died. The charges do not appear to be in line with established guidance. This is fault. The care provider has refunded part of the fees.
-
Alliance Care Ltd (20 004 095)
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 07-Apr-2021
Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his late mother, Miss F who had complex care needs. He complained Alliance Care Limited (the care provider) missed two of Miss F’s care calls during a day in December 2019. This meant Miss F was left in bed, without food and without her medication. The care provider has accepted fault following a Council’s safeguarding enquiry into the matter. We recommend the care provider apologise and pay Mr X £100 to remedy the distress and time and trouble the matter caused him.
-
Gracewell Healthcare Limited (19 018 997)
Statement Upheld Residential care 02-Apr-2021
Summary: We upheld part of Dr C’s complaint, on behalf of the late Mr and Mrs D, about fees charged by the Care Provider. There was no fault in how the Care Provider charged a moving in fee when Mr and Mrs D became permanent residents in a care home. However, there were faults in how it charged other fees and in its invoicing. This caused uncertainty for Dr C and the Care Provider agreed to apologise.
-
Statement Upheld Covid-19 01-Apr-2021
Summary: Mr X complains Key2Support failed to care properly for his mother, Mrs Y, putting her at risk of harm. Mrs Y was often left waiting for Care Workers to arrive, unable to get up or take her medication. Key2Support also sent a Care Worker with COVID-19 symptoms, despite agreeing this should not happen. It needs to apologise, pay financial redress and prevent similar problems from happening again.
-
Premiere Care (Southern) Limited (19 004 281)
Statement Upheld Charging 31-Mar-2021
Summary: Ms X says Mrs Y’s care provider increased her weekly fee by £150 despite her care needs not changing. We have found evidence of fault in how the care provider raised Mrs Y’s care fees and have recommended a remedy for the injustice caused to her and any other affected residents. The care provider agreed to our recommendations.
-
Foxley Lodge Care Ltd (19 015 433)
Statement Upheld Residential care 30-Mar-2021
Summary: Mr X complained about the way Foxley Lodge Care Ltd (the Care Provider) gave notice to the late Mrs Y and did not deal adequately with his complaint about this. We found the Care Provider did not follow the correct procedure in giving notice and did not deal with Mr X’s complaint adequately. This caused Mr X significant distress. We have recommended it apologise and take action to prevent similar faults in future.