Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the delay in her mother’s, Mrs C’s, care provider returning monies it owed. This is because the care provider has paid back the money it owed Mrs C and apologised for the delay. We are satisfied any injustice caused to Ms B or Mrs C has been remedied.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained about the way her mother’s, Mrs C’s, care provider invoiced for care. Although she has now received all of the money she is owed, Ms B says she is concerned the care provider’s repeated accounting failures, failure to reimburse her the £1800 deposit they paid and charges made for care not provided, is a systemic failure and wants the Ombudsman to investigate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I discussed the concerns with Ms B and considered the information and documentation she provided. I sent Ms B a copy of my draft decision and considered her comments on it.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms B complained about the delay in Mrs C’s care provider reimbursing her the deposit she had paid for her live-in care and delay in reimbursing payment for care Mrs C did not receive following the care provider giving notice when it could no longer manage Mrs C’s care needs.
5. The Care provider explained it could not settle the final accounts without monies being paid, which in this case were to be paid by the NHS Continuing Health Care (CHC). It apologised for the delay and said once the monies were received it settled the account within 28 days. Ms B says the two matters were separate and the care provider should have reimbursed the money Mrs C had paid when it knew the NHS had agreed to pay. We could not say the care provider should have reimbursed Mrs C for care she had received until it was satisfied it had received payment from the NHS. The care provider has explained this point and further investigation by the Ombudsman could achieve no more.
6. Although Ms B is concerned this is happening to other service users, I have not seen any evidence to support Ms B’s assertions that failure to reimburse monies owed to Mrs C earlier is a systemic failure within the care provider’s accounting. The care provider has explained the cause of the delay in this case, apologised and has now reimbursed Mrs C all monies owed.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the care provider has paid back the money it owed Mrs C and apologised for the delay. We are satisfied any injustice caused to Ms B or Mrs C has been remedied.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman