Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the quality of domiciliary care. Investigation by us is not likely to lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X seeks.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the quality of domiciliary care provided to her father
   (Mr Y). She said the Care Provider did not have an accurate care plan in place or keep records of care provided. She said care staff were rude and disrespectful and the Care Provider refused to remove specific carers from Mr Y’s care.
2. Ms X said Mr Y did not receive his care as agreed for three and a half weeks. She said Mr Y experienced distress, and she had needed to provide some care, including intimate care, herself. Ms X wanted the Care Provider to accept fault, waive Mr Y’s fees of £1,228, and make service improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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. Ms X complains about a three and a half week period of domiciliary care provided to her father in late 2025. She seeks a waiver of Mr Y’s fees in full.
7. Mr Y has died since the period of care this complaint relates to. We will not normally recommend a waiver or refund of fees to a person’s estate, where doing so relies on an assessment of the quality of care. This is because any significant injustice resulting from poor quality care would be to the person in need of care, and a refund of fees could not remedy the person’s injustice after they have died.
8. Ms X claims her own injustice in this instance, relating to providing some care to Mr Y herself. We will normally only investigate a complaint where:
• the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the service provider, or
• there are continuous and ongoing instances of a lower level injustice that remain unresolved over a long period of time.
9. Taking into account the period of the care in question and Ms X’s reports of the care she provided, this threshold would not be met. There is not a significant injustice in Ms X’s own right that would itself justify investigating the matter further.
10. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome, and we could not achieve a waiver of Mr Y’s care fees. We will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because doing so is not likely to lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X seeks

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman