Summary: The Ombudsman should not pursue this complaint about the care provider’s actions. This is mainly because the central part of the complaint, concerning disputed care charges, is a matter for the courts.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains that Executive 2000 Recruitment Ltd (‘the Care Provider’) overcharged his parents for care, wrongly accused Mr B of stalking staff and stopped providing care without giving proper notice.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We may investigate complaints from a person affected by the matter in the complaint, or from someone the person has authorised in writing to act for him or her. If the person has died or cannot authorise someone to act, we may investigate a complaint from a personal representative or from someone we consider suitable to represent the person affected. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A or 34C)
3. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Mr B provided and discussed the complaint with him. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Care Provider was contracted to provide care for Mr B’s parents in their home. Sadly, Mr B’s parents have now died. Mr B is the personal representative of their estates.

Charging

7. Mr B believes the Care Provider overcharged for his parents’ care so the estate has not paid the whole sum the Care Provider asked for. I understand the Care Provider started court action against the estate in respect of the disputed sum. Mr B has told the court he believes the sum demanded is wrong. The court has not yet decided the matter.
8. We cannot become involved in matters that are the subject of court proceedings. If Mr B believes the Care Provider is charging too much, he can wait and see if the Care Provider continues with the court action. If the action does not continue, the estate need not pay the disputed amount. If the court action continues, Mr B will be able to put his arguments to the court, which will decide if the disputed amount is owed. That is the appropriate way forward here. We cannot decide a matter that is ultimately for the court to decide.

Accusation about Mr B’s behaviour

9. Mr B reports the Care Provider accused him by telephone of stalking its staff outside his father’s home. Mr B states he was not stalking staff. I appreciate such an allegation would have caused Mr B some concern. However, I do not consider this disadvantaged Mr B significantly enough to justify the Ombudsman investigating this point now.
10. Mr B states the Care Provider told his father it had called the police about the alleged stalking. Mr B states that, before the Care Provider spoke to his father about this, Mr B had already told his father the allegation was unfounded and that there had been no report to the police. As Mr B’s father is now sadly deceased, I am afraid we cannot achieve anything more in terms of any injustice this allegation might have caused him. For this reason, we shall not investigate this part of the complaint and we shall not reach a view either way on whether there was fault on this point. In any event, I note Mr B’s statement that his father had already been told the police were not involved.

The Care Provider ending its service

11. Mr B states the Care Provider stopped providing services at very short notice rather than completing its notice period. Mr B arranged replacement care.
12. Any anxiety or uncertainty this caused Mr B’s father cannot now be remedied. I realise that, separately, Mr B had to make some effort to resolve the matter. However, as replacement care was quickly in place, I do not consider this caused a significant enough injustice to warrant investigation of whether the Care Provider was at fault.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because the alleged overcharging is a matter for the courts and there is insufficient outstanding injustice for us to pursue the other points.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman