Summary: The Council failed to properly investigate Mr X’s complaint about the domiciliary care his mother received. It then delayed dealing with his complaint about this. This caused both Mr X and his mother unnecessary worry and stress. The Council has agreed a satisfactory remedy in acknowledgement of this.

The complaint

1. Mr X is dissatisfied with the financial remedy offered by the Council in acknowledgement of the unsatisfactory domiciliary care provided to his mother, Mrs Y

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have:

• considered the complaint and supporting information submitted by Mr X;
• considered the correspondence between Mr X and the Council, including the Council’s response to the complaint;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the responses;
• considered relevant legislation;
• offered Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on a draft of this document, and considered the comments made.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation

5. The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 set out the fundamental standards those registered to provide care services must achieve. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has issued guidance on how to meet the fundamental standards below which care must never fall.

Background

6. Mrs Y is a senior citizen. She has health issues which impact on her day-to-day life. She also finds verbal communication difficult and relies on aids to assist her.
7. Mrs Y lives in her own home and receives domiciliary care from a care agency commissioned by the Council. Mrs Y pays the full cost of her care.
8. Mr X says as far back as 2023 he consistently raised concerns with the Council about the services provided by the care agency. He reported visits were rushed and carers did not communicate with Mrs Y properly and that they did the bare minimum at each visit. He says visits were cut short and carers sat outside in a car until their next visit. During a review of Mrs Y’s needs in January 2024 a social worker recorded she had witnessed carers sat outside Mrs Y’s home for nearly an hour.
9. Mr X kept a record of the length of each visit, which he provided to the Council. He did not believe Mrs Y should pay the full cost of the care as she had not received the service she had paid for. Mr X says matters were not resolved so he submitted a formal complaint to the Council in May 2024.
10. An officer from the Council telephoned Mr X in May 2024 to discuss the complaint. The Council responded in writing in July 2024.The author of the letter did not acknowledge specific failings, she identified improvements relating to carers being reminded to stay for the full duration of calls, and matters relating to a service user’s expressed preference for a specific carer. The author acknowledged it had taken some time to investigate and respond to Mr X’s complaint and by way of a remedy offered to reduce Mrs Y’s outstanding balance by £1500.
11. Mr X was dissatisfied and submitted a complaint to this office, saying there had been no meaningful resolution.
12. In response to formal enquiries from this office the Council said it had reviewed the complaint and concluded it had not robustly investigated the complaint and therefore, was not confident of its findings. It said a manager had spoken to Mr X and apologised for the way the Council has handled the complaint and informed him that it would be reviewing its findings. The Council asked this office for additional time to complete this.
13. Following this, the Council wrote to this office to say, it had obtained further information from the Care Provider and failings in the service provided to Mrs Y had been identified. It also acknowledged information provided to Mr X about durations of calls less than 30 minutes was misleading. It confirms its minimum call duration is always 30 minutes. NICE (National Institute Health & Care Excellence) guidelines for councils and home care providers say home care visits should last at least 30 minutes.
14. The Council acknowledges the worry caused to Mrs Y, and the time and trouble Mr X has been put to pursuing the complaint with the Council and this office. In light of this, it reconsidered its previous offer of a remedy, saying it was not sufficient to remedy the discrepancy for the care and support provided between September 2023 – April 2024. It says its initial offer to reduce the care fees did not recognise Mr X’s time and trouble pursuing the complaint with the Council and this office.
15. The Council also says it has learnt from the issues raised here and intends to roll out a briefing to all relevant staff highlighting its expectations in respect of communication, duration of care visits, and approach to formal complaint investigations. The Ombudsman welcomes this action.

 Analysis

16. The Council acknowledges failings in the domiciliary care provided to Mrs Y. This caused her unnecessary stress, worry and anxiety, which the Council acknowledges. The Council’s offer to apologise and make a significant deduction from the outstanding care fees represents an adequate remedy.
17. The Council also acknowledges failings in the way it initially dealt with Mr X’s complaint about the above. These failings were only identified after Mr X brought his complaint to this office, which caused him unnecessary time and trouble. The Council’s offer of an apology and time and trouble payment represents an adequate remedy.
18. I am satisfied the Council has taken robust action to address the issues raised, both in respect of the care Mrs Y received, and in the complaint handling process. There are no further recommendations required from this office.

Back to top

Agreed Actions

19. The Council has agreed to:

• apologise to Mr X for its failure to properly investigate his complaint and pay him £350 in acknowledgement of his time and trouble pursing the complaint with the Council and this office.
• provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions with four weeks of the final decision.

Back to top

Final Decision

20. The Council acknowledged it failed to properly investigate Mr X’s complaint about the domiciliary care his mother received. It then delayed dealing with complaint about this. This caused both Mr X and his mother unnecessary worry and stress. The Council agreed to provide a remedy in acknowledgement of this.
21. The above recommendations are a suitable way to settle the complaint.
22. It is on this basis; the complaint will be closed.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman