Decision search
Your search has 550 results
-
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.
-
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.
-
Culpeper Care Limited (20 005 262)
Statement Upheld Residential care 30-Mar-2021
Summary: There was fault in the care home’s failure to properly check the identity of an agency care worker and in the failure to carry out the necessary Covid-19 checks. Mr C did not receive the one-to-one care he should have done during the morning. In addition, one of the care workers breached Mr C’s dignity and right to privacy by taking a photo of him. There was further fault in the Home’s actions after it discovered the incidents and in its complaint responses. We recommend the Home apologises, acknowledges the fault and pays £300 to Mr C’s daughter.
-
Change, Grow, Live (20 001 063b)
Statement Upheld Other 29-Mar-2021
Summary: We consider East Sussex County Council, Change Grow Live, Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and Old School Surgery missed the opportunity to meet and discuss Ms E’s worsening alcohol misuse and mental health before she died. That has caused Ms E’s family uncertainty. They will not know if a joint meeting would have changed the outcome. The organisations should apologise for that fault.
-
B & M Care/Colleycare Ltd (19 015 919)
Statement Upheld Residential care 29-Mar-2021
Summary: Mr X complained that a care provider failed to properly assess his mother’s needs and should not have accepted her as a resident. He complained about aspects of the care provided. We found no fault in the care provider’s decision to accept her as a resident or its decision that it could meet Mrs X’s needs. We found there was a failure to carry out a risk assessment, but this caused no significant injustice.
-
Bupa Care Homes (BNH) Limited (19 015 918)
Statement Upheld Residential care 29-Mar-2021
Summary: We found that Allington Court Care Home failed to maintain appropriate records, failed to properly monitor Mr X’s mother’s food and fluid intake and did not pass on accurate information to another care home. Mr X also complained that Allington Court wrongly influenced decisions taken about his mother’s eligibility for CHC. We found no fault in this respect. We recommended a remedy to recognise that the family were left with some uncertainty about the impact of the fault on their mother.