Domiciliary care

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Yarrowside Ltd (19 020 995)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 24-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs C complains that care provided to her mother by Bluebird Care (Wiltshire South) was of poor quality. The Ombudsman finds there was some fault by the care provider in this case, causing injustice for which a remedy has been agreed.

  • Care O.W.L Limited (19 005 712)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 20-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains she has been unfairly excluded from involvement with her mother's care arrangements. The Ombudsman has identified one area of service failure involving storage of records. The Care Provider has agreed a change to the current practice.

  • North Somerset Council (19 014 596)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 19-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains that a Council-commissioned care provider did not provide the support in his care plan. He says this caused his care package to break down. Mr B also complains about the Council's response to his safeguarding concerns. There is fault and the Council will put in place a clearer care plan.

  • Northumberland County Council (19 017 603)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 13-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide full information about her financial assessment and the costs of her care. She also complained about the actions of the care provider, Embracing Care. The Ombudsman found there was fault causing injustice when the Council failed to provide enough information about charging. The Council agreed to a suitable remedy.

  • Sheffield City Council (18 016 351)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 13-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains on behalf of his partner, Ms C, about the quality of care she received between August and November 2018. We uphold the complaint finding fault in the care arranged by the Council and delivered by TLC Sheffield Home Care Ltd. We also find fault in how the Council responded to Mr B's service requests and complaint. This caused injustice to Mr B and his partner as distress. The Council accepts these findings. At the end of this statement we set out the action it has agreed to remedy the injustice caused to Mr B and Ms C and improve the service it provides to others.

  • East Riding of Yorkshire Council (19 016 285)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 12-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs B complains that the Council did not properly provide domiciliary care to her mother Mrs G. Mrs G's medication was missed and incorrectly administered, Mrs B's complaints were not dealt with properly, Mrs G's care plan was not updated properly, the Council did not inform Mrs B of safeguarding outcomes and Mrs B was not given the option of continuing care provision during the interim period after notice was given to stop Mrs G's care. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B, pay Mrs B £250 for Mrs B's distress, ensure complaint procedures are made available, review safeguarding cases and provide guidance to staff.

  • Leeds City Council (19 017 395)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 03-Nov-2020

    Summary: The Council acknowledges the Care Provider failed to clarify timings of home care visits and that there were occasions when Mr Y's care was not delivered in accordance with his care plan.

  • Bayford New Horizons Limited AKA Bluebird Care (Chichester) (19 011 857)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 02-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs C complained about the homecare Mr F received. She complained about the timing of visits, the cleanliness of Mr F's property and an alleged delay in involving the GP on two occasions. The Ombudsman found there were incidents when it took too long in the morning for Mr F to receive his breakfast or personal care. The care provider has agreed to provide an apology for this.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (19 016 236)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 26-Oct-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains on behalf of his late father, Mr C, that the care provider commissioned by the Council to provide domiciliary care for him failed to provide the agreed care. The Ombudsman finds there is insufficient evidence that the standard of care provided was inadequate but the daily visit logs completed by the carers were insufficiently detailed causing uncertainty as to whether the agreed support was provided. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and pay him £250 in recognition of this uncertainty.

  • West Sussex County Council (19 016 389)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 19-Oct-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains about the standard of care provided to her foster father. She says there were signs her foster father's ability to cope at home had declined and the Council did not take action to safeguard him. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for not arranging appropriate care and support for her foster father in January 2018. We also find fault with the Council for not completing a mental capacity assessment. We do not find fault with the Council's care assessments.

Privacy settings

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.