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.

Domiciliary care

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Ethical Homecare Ltd (20 011 709)

    Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 03-Aug-2021

    Summary: We could not achieve anything further by continuing to investigate this complaint.

  • Lancashire County Council (20 009 792)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 27-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council commissioned care provider failed to take action when his mother got a pressure sore. The care provider was at fault as it failed to follow its procedures. There was no fault in the way the Council carried out a safeguarding investigation into Mr X's concerns although there was an error in the letter it sent to Mr X and it delayed responding to Mr X's complaint. The remedy the Council has offered Mrs Y and Mr X through its complaints' procedure is appropriate. In addition, it has agreed to pay Mr X £100 to acknowledge the frustration caused by the delay in its complaints process.

  • Independent People Homecare Services (20 010 369)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 14-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complains the care provider failed to provide a suitable carer for her care needs. As a result, she had no choice but to commission an alternative care provider. We find fault with the care provider and have made recommendations.

  • Cumbria County Council (20 001 814)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 12-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council's Generic Domiciliary Care policy financially disadvantaged his disabled mother, Mrs Y. He said the Council also incorrectly charged for Mrs Y's care. We do not find fault with the Council's policy. However, the Council was at fault for incorrectly charging Mrs Y for care she did not receive and for failing to respond to Mr X's complaints. The Council has already recalculated Mrs Y's care costs. It has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £100 in recognition of the avoidable time and trouble he has gone to in pursuing his complaints. It will also remind relevant staff to follow the Adult Social Care complaints policy.

  • Independent People Homecare Services (20 005 910)

    Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 01-Jul-2021

    Summary: The care provider's records show Mrs X refused replacement care after her disabled son Mr A injured his care worker, and that she asked to terminate the contract. The actions of the care provider in asking for the payment of notice specified in the contract did not cause injustice to Mrs X or Mr A.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 009 633)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 29-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains about overcharging his late father-in-law, Mr Y, by the Council's care provider Comfort Call Tameside. The Council accepts Mr Y was overcharged. It has remedied the injustice by repaying money to his estate and paying financial redress to Mr X for the distress caused and the time and trouble it has put him to. It needs to identify anyone else who has been affected and repay any overpayments.

  • County Care Berkshire Ltd (18 008 976)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 23-Jun-2021

    Summary: Ms X suffered injustice due to fault in the way County Care Berkshire Limited provided a home care service to her late mother, Mrs A. We have made recommendations for a remedy. Sadly Mrs A passed away after Ms X made the complaint so it is too late to provide a remedy for her.

  • Rampion Limited (20 007 621)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 23-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mr D complained about the domiciliary care his mother, Ms E, received from the Care Provider. We find that Mr D and Ms E suffered an injustice when the Care Provider failed to provide suitable care to Ms E. The Care Provider has agreed to our recommendations to address this injustice.

  • Kent County Council (20 009 349)

    Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 22-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mr B complained that the Council delayed in making suitable care arrangements for his mother, Mrs C when she was discharged from hospital. We find no fault with the Council's actions.

  • Churchill Health Care Ltd (20 008 754)

    Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 18-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained about the quality of care provided to his father Mr Y. There were issues with communication between the care provider and Mr Y about late calls or staffing changes, and the support plan was not clear about which domestic tasks staff would carry out. This was fault and is likely to have caused Mr Y some anxiety. There was no fault in the way the care provider decided it could not support Mr Y with a bath or in the way it reached the decision to end the care package. It has already undertaken procedural changes to address these faults. It has also agreed to apologise to Mr Y and pay him £100 to acknowledge the impact of the faults.