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.

Residential care

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • West Berkshire Council (21 013 890)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 17-May-2022

    Summary: The Council's complaint responses should have explained the circumstances of Mrs Y's fall in a care home it commissioned. This was fault causing avoidable distress. The Council will apologise for its poor complaint responses. There was no fault in placing Mrs Y in a care home in a different area because the evidence shows her family agreed.

  • Newgrange of Cheshunt Limited (21 008 654)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 16-May-2022

    Summary: Miss X complained about the care her mother, Mrs Y, received from Newgrange of Cheshunt Limited. The Care Provider was at fault. Staff did not properly follow policies on using a transfer aid and on wound care management whilst providing care to Mrs Y. Staff also did not notify Mrs Y's family about her injury. The Care Provider has recognised its faults and has put measures in place to prevent a recurrence of fault. The Care Provider has also agreed to apologise to Mrs Y and her family for the distress the faults caused them. It will make a symbolic payment of £150 to Mrs Y. In addition, the Care Provider has agreed it will review staff knowledge and understanding in relation to the poor care it delivered to Mrs Y.

  • Axelbond Limited (21 013 652)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 15-May-2022

    Summary: Mr X complains the care provider failed to deduct funded nursing care payments from his mother's weekly care charges. We find fault with the care provider as it has failed to provide clear written information about how it will treat FNC payments. We have made recommendations for the care provider to remedy the injustice caused.

  • Heathfield House Nursing Homes Ltd (21 010 725)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 15-May-2022

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the standard of care provided to her late father Mr G between May and his death in July 2021 while he stayed at Heathfield House Nursing Homes Ltd (the Care Provider). The Care Provider failed to keep clear and comprehensive records which leaves uncertainty about whether it followed Mr G's care plan. The Care Provider should apologise to Mrs X and pay her £150 to recognise the distress and uncertainty this caused.

  • Saltwood Care Centre Ltd (21 011 131)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 12-May-2022

    Summary: Mr B complained the Care Provider unfairly ended Ms C and Mr D's contract without providing satisfactory reasoning. Mr B says this caused Ms C and Mr D distress in having to move. He also says this caused him distress in having to make the arrangements without satisfactory notice. We do not find the Care Provider caused an injustice by cancelling the contract, but did cause an injustice for not following its policy. The Care Provider has agreed to pay Mr B a sum of money, has reviewed its procedures and will share the final decision with staff.

  • Somerset County Council (21 012 954)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 09-May-2022

    Summary: A Care Provider, acting on behalf of the Council, acknowledged failings in the management of Mr Y's care before the involvement of this office, but it failed to offer an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused. There is no evidence to show the Council took appropriate action in response to the events or what action it took to ensure safe effective care provision for other residents similarly affected and for those whom it continues to commission placements.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (21 016 366)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 08-May-2022

    Summary: There was no failure to offer or provide personal care and showering to Mrs Y. So the Care Home which acted for the Council was not at fault.

  • Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (21 002 687)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 05-May-2022

    Summary: The Council commissioned Mr Y's care so it is at fault for the failings in that care. It is also at fault for the way it dealt with Ms X's complaint about this.

  • Suffolk County Council (21 002 496)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 26-Apr-2022

    Summary: Miss X complained about the poor standard of care provided to her late mother while resident in a care home, arranged and commissioned by the Council. We have found there was fault with some aspects of care and recording practices and the Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Miss X for the injustice caused.

  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (21 011 478)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 20-Apr-2022

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's charges for his late mother's care, that the Council did not provide adequate care and it falsified its records, causing him distress. We find the Council at fault on its charges, but we are satisfied with the actions already taken to remedy this. We have decided to discontinue our investigation on the remaining complaints because they are out of time and further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.