Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the alleged Care Provider’s failings during the complainant’s admission to a residential care home. This is because the Care Provider has already offered a suitable remedy for the issues raised in the complaint and the complainant is satisfied with the outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant’s daughter (Mrs X) says that Belgravia Care Home Limited failed to provide suitable accommodation for her mother (Mrs Y) which called for an immediate change of the care provider. Mrs X complains about Belgravia Care Home Limited charging her for a week’s notice and queries its practices when admitting new residents and issuing charges. Mrs X is seeking the full refund of her mother’s residential care charges for one week.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers and decide whether their actions have caused an injustice, or could have caused injustice, to the person making the complaint or others. I have used the term fault to describe such actions. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B and 34C)
3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
4. We normally name care homes and other providers in our decision statements. However, we will not do so if we think someone could be identified from the name of the care home or care provider. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34H(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information and documents provided by Mrs X.
6. Mrs X and Belgravia Care Home Limited had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Clarence House is a residential care provider and a part of Belgravia Care Home Limited (Care Provider).
8. Because of the decline in Mrs Y’s mobility, in September 2021 Mrs X urgently sought a residential care home for her mother.
9. Mrs X discussed her mother’s needs with the Care Provider’s manager, who confirmed its suitability and offered her a place from the next day.
10. Mrs Y stayed at the Care Provider’s for a week but during this time Mrs X was increasing concerned about the suitability of the accommodation offered, such as lack of space in Mrs Y’s room to use a wheelchair and absence of hoist in the bathroom.
11. Because of her serious concerns, Mrs X decided to move her mother without delay to a better suited residential care home. The Care Provider asked for a payment for two weeks, treating a second week as a notice period.
12. Mrs X paid for two weeks according to the invoice but immediately asked for a refund of one week’s fee claiming a few failings in the Care Provider admissions process such as lack of robust assessment and a written contract.
13. The Care Provider at first offered a part-refund of £200 but eventually, after Mrs X brought her mother’s complaint to the Ombudsman, agreed to pay back the full equivalent of a week’s fee. This refund has now been completed.
14. Mrs X is now satisfied and does not wish to continue this matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have discontinued this investigation as a suitable remedy has already been provided to Mrs Y.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman