Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Care Provider’s decision to charge the person affected for the termination notice period stated in the contract for care. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains the Care Provider asked his mother to sign documents for care services which included a care contract when she had issues affecting her mental capacity to understand the documents. He says the Care Provider did not make family aware it had asked his mother to sign the documents. He complains the Care Provider will not waive the four weeks’ termination notice period which applied when his mother moved to a different care provider because of the care standards. Mr B wants the Care Provider to waive the charges and ensure people are supported by a suitable person when it asks them to sign forms.

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. I have used the term fault to describe such actions. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B and 34C)
3. 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 action has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 introduced the “Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA)”. This replaced the Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA). An LPA is a legal document, which allows a person (‘the donor’) to choose one or more persons to make decisions for them, when they become unable to do so themselves. The 'attorney' or ‘donee’ is the person chosen to make a decision on the donor’s behalf. Any decision must be in the donor’s best interests.
7. Mr B acts as attorney for his mother who signed a lasting power of attorney in 2025 so he can support her with decisions relating to her property and financial affairs.
8. He complained to the Care Provider about his dissatisfaction with the four weeks’ notice period which applied when his mother moved to a residential care home. He said when his mother signed the contract for care she was given three documents she could not understand and she did not have time to seek clarity.
   Mr B said the charges which applied during the notice period did not allow room for changes in circumstances.
9. The Care Provider replied to the complaint and said the care contract was legally binding and stipulated four weeks’ notice is required to terminate care. It said this was standard practice across the sector. It confirmed it had reviewed the care records and there was no indication Mr B’s mother lacked mental capacity to make decisions when she signed the contract. It said the Mr B’s mother could have continued to received care, but she chose an alternative provider. It did not find fault in the way it had followed its processes.
10. The Care Provider sent Mr B a second response following further consideration of the complaint. It said, the four-week notice period was a standard term in all its care service contracts. It said the notice period applied to all parties. It explained the charges covered administration and staff costs as it operated a four-week rolling rota. The Care Provider confirmed Mr B’s mother was accompanied by her daughter when she signed the documents. It also said it had considered the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Mr B’s mother had capacity to decide to sign the contract. It said no issues was raised at the time regarding her capacity to sign the contract.
11. We will not investigate this complaint the Care Provider’s actions have not caused injustice to the complainant or the person affected. The notice period was stipulated in the contract and Mr B’s mother had a family member present when she signed the contract. Mental capacity is time and decision specific and there is not enough evidence to show Mr B’s mother lacked capacity to sign the forms at the time. The Care Provider’s decision to charge for the notice period is not an action that causes injustice as it is entitled to charge.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because The Care Provider’s action has not caused injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman