Summary: We ended our investigation into Miss X’s complaint about how the Care Provider pursued her for outstanding care charges and the care and support it provided to her. This is because it was unlikely a further investigation would achieve a different outcome and it was unlikely we could add to the Care Provider’s previous investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Care Provider:
• aggressively pursued her for outstanding care charges; and
• provided her with poor care and support.
2. Miss X said it caused her distress and made her feel unsafe. She wants the Care Provider to apologise to her and provide her with a financial remedy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider; or
• it is unlikely a further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

4. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke with Miss X and considered the information she provided.
6. I considered information from the Care Provider.
7. I also made enquiries with the Council and considered information it provided.
8. Miss X and the Care Provider had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision. I considered any comments received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

9. Miss X has health problems and requires support to live in her own home and access the community.
10. In early 2021, the Council completed a financial assessment with Miss X. The assessment concluded Miss X and the Council would pay a contribution towards a package of care for her.
11. Miss X wanted to arrange her own care and support. It was therefore agreed Miss X and the Council would pay their contributions into a direct payments account. The direct payments account would be managed by a third-party agency, at Miss X’s request.
12. Direct payments are monetary payments made to individuals who ask for them to meet some or all of their eligible care and support needs. They enable people to arrange their own care and support to meet those needs.
13. Between mid-December 2021 and mid-January 2022, Miss X had a package of care in place with the Care Provider. The Care Provider gave Miss X a 24-hour package of care with a live-in care worker that included support with:
• personal care;
• meal preparation; and
• accessing the community.
14. Towards the end of December 2021, Miss X became unhappy with the Care Worker. She asked the Care Provider to replace the Care Worker. A week later, the Care Provider gave Miss X a new care worker.
15. Between the end of December 2021 and mid-January 2022, the Care Provider did not receive payments for the care and support it had provided to Miss X. During this time, the Care Provider contacted Miss X to query the matter however, the Care Provider said Miss X did not cooperate and instead, verbally abused staff over the telephone.
16. Miss X said she told the Care Provider payments were going to be delayed during this period due to the Council delaying its payments. Despite this, Miss X said the Care Provider called her at unsociable hours and threatened to take further action if she did not clear the outstanding charges. In her complaint to us, Miss X said the Care Worker she had at the time answered a phone call from the Care Provider at 3am. She said the Care Worker could support her allegations the Care Provider had threatened her. In addition, Miss X said at the time, she contacted the Police about the matter however, she does not have a copy of the police report.
17. At the beginning of February 2022, the Care Provider contacted the Council to resolve the outstanding charges. It told the Council it had called Miss X and asked her nicely about the outstanding care charges but Miss X was aggressive and insulting. A few days later, the Council resolved the matter and as a result, Miss X no longer owed any payment to the Care Provider.
18. Around the same time, Miss X complained to the Care Provider and said she was unhappy with the way it had tried to pursue her for the outstanding care charges. Miss X again told the Care Provider the payments were late due to the Council’s payments being late. She wanted the Care Provider to apologise to her and provide her with a financial remedy for the distress caused.
19. The Care Provider did not uphold Miss X’s complaint. Miss X remained unhappy and complained to us.
20. In response to my enquiries:
• the Care Provider said it did not contact Miss X during unsociable hours and demand payment from her in an aggressive manner;
• the Care Provider said Miss X made no further complaints about her care and support once it had replaced the first Care Worker; and
• the Council said it did not delay making any payments into Miss X’s direct payments account and it did not tell Miss X its payments were going to be delayed.

Back to top

Findings

21. Miss X said the Care Provider was aggressive towards her when her care charges were delayed. The Care Provider denies this and says it was nice to her when asking her to pay the outstanding charges she owed.
22. Miss X said she contacted the Police about the threatening call from the Care Provider. I asked Miss X for the police report as supporting evidence but she was unable to provide it.
23. Miss X said the Care Worker could confirm the call took place. However, as the events were in January/February 2022, I cannot rely on the Care Worker’s recollection of events over 18 months later. I have been given no other evidence, taken from the time, that a call at 3am between January/February 2022 occurred.
24. As there is conflicting evidence, with different recollections about what happened, and no contemporaneous evidence, I am unable to conclude what happened, even on the balance of probabilities. It would not be proportionate to use our limited resources to investigate this further. In addition, Miss X is no longer using the Care Provider and the Care Provider has received all the monies it was owed. It is unlikely a further investigation would achieve a different outcome. As a result, I will not investigate this part of the complaint further.
25. Miss X said she received poor care and support from the Care Provider. The Care Provider’s records state Miss X was unhappy with the Care Worker and told the Care Provider. The Care Provider promptly responded to Miss X’s concerns and replaced the Care Worker. This was appropriate action to take and further investigation from us would not achieve anything more. Therefore, I have also decided not to continue with the investigation into this aspect of Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

26. We have ended our investigation. It was unlikely a further investigation would achieve a different outcome and it was unlikely we could add to the Care Provider’s previous investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman