Domiciliary care

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Promedica24 (Lancashire) Limited (23 012 137)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 04-Mar-2024

    Summary: There is evidence to show the Care Provider failed to provide adequately trained live-in carers for Mr Y.

  • Collingswood House (23 000 508)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 29-Feb-2024

    Summary: Mr X complains that Collingswood Care provided inadequate care to Mr Y. The Care Provider is at fault as it did not properly record the administration of medicines to Mr Y which resulted in him not being given medication on one occasion. Collingswood Care’s handling of Mr X’s complaint was poor which caused frustration to him. Collingswood Care should remedy the injustice to Mr X by sending an apology to him. It should also carry out the recommended service improvements.

  • Birmingham City Council (23 010 308)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 27-Feb-2024

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to provide appropriate care and support when her sister (Miss Y) was discharged from hospital. We found Miss Y’s needs were documented appropriately but the Council failed to ensure the agency providing the care had sufficient time to complete the required tasks. We found this was fault. We recommended an apology and a review of learning to avoid the same situation re-occurring.

  • Alina Homecare Services Limited (23 001 747)

    Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 27-Feb-2024

    Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his relative Mr Y, about the live-in care given to Mr Y by the Care Provider. We decided not to uphold the complaint finding insufficient evidence of any fault in the Provider’s service causing injustice to Mr Y.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (23 005 107)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 22-Feb-2024

    Summary: Miss X complained about the care her late father, Mr Y, received at home from a care provider acting on the Council’s behalf. Miss X also complained about how the Council charged for Mr Y’s care. The Council was at fault in how it transferred Mr Y to its long-term care team, for delay in carrying out a financial assessment, for a poor complaint response and for the Care Provider’s visits being too short and sometimes very late. This caused Miss X injustice for which the Council will apologise and pay her £300. The Council will also remind the Care Provider of proper practice in home care.

  • City of Wolverhampton Council (23 015 917)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 20-Feb-2024

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about care provided to the late Mrs B. This is because Mr D has not suffered a significant enough injustice from the care provider’s actions to warrant an ombudsman investigation.

  • Warrington Council (23 009 562)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 14-Feb-2024

    Summary: We found fault with the Council for the inadequate non-residential care provided to the complainant (Mr Y) by Premium Care Limited and its complaint-handling. We also found fault with the Council for not consulting Mr Y’s daughter (Mrs X) about proposed changes to Mr Y’s care plan. The Council has accepted its fault and the injustice caused to Mr Y and Mrs X and offered suitable remedies.

  • Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (23 014 392)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 13-Feb-2024

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care Mr X received. We do not consider the representative, Mr Y, to be suitable.

  • Agincare UK Limited (23 003 914)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 13-Feb-2024

    Summary: Mr X complained care worker’s visits to his mother, Mrs Y, were shorter than they should have been. We find the visits were frequently short and there were occasions Mrs Y did not receive appropriate care. This caused Mrs Y distress and Mr X distress and uncertainty. Agincare UK Limited will pay Mr X £200 in recognition of his injustice. Agincare UK Limited has reduced Mrs Y’s outstanding invoice by £1000, which remedies her injustice.

  • Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (23 014 162)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 12-Feb-2024

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to accept Mrs C as a suitable representative for Mrs D. We do not consider Mrs C to be a suitable representative to act on behalf of Mrs D.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings