Summary: Ms X complained the care home failed to provide the contracted accommodation she agreed to. The care home has accepted fault for not providing the contracted accommodation and delays in handling the complaint. The care home reduced the balance owed by £2,000. The Ombudsman considers this reduction a suitable way to remedy the injustice caused. The Care Home offered to remove the final seven days’ worth of charges due to Ms X vacating the room. The Ombudsman considers this reduction appropriate.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the care home failed to provide the contracted accommodation she agreed to.
2. Ms X says her en-suite was not working and the care home moved her to a smaller non-ensuite room while repairs took place.
3. Ms X says the care home did not provide her with an allocated space for her mobility scooter.
4. Ms X says the care home has over-charged for the accommodation provided compared to what she contracted.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers and decide whether their actions have caused an injustice, or could have caused injustice, to the person making the complaint. I have used the term fault to describe such actions. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B and 34C)
6. If an adult social care provider’s actions have caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34H(4))
7. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Care Quality Commission (CQC), we will share this decision with CQC.
8. If we are satisfied with a care provider’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I have considered the information provided by Ms X and the Care Home including:
• Copies of complaint correspondence;
• Copies of invoices and a statement of account; and
• A standard residents admission form and terms and conditions.
10. The Care Home commented on my draft decision. Ms X did not provide comment. I have considered the Care Home’s comments before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Care Home’s complaints procedure

11. Barchester Healthcare Ltd has a three-stage complaints policy. At each stage of complaint, the complainant should receive a written acknowledgement within three working days and a full response within 20 working days.

Background

12. Ms X contracted with Barchester Healthcare Ltd. for an en-suite shower room from 11 December 2017 costing £910 per week which she paid by direct debit. The Care Home says the average cost for an en-suite shower room at its home was £1200 per week but Ms X negotiated a reduced cost. Ms X says there was an agreement for the care home to provide a storage and charging facility for her mobility scooter. Neither the care home nor Ms X has provided me with evidence of her contract agreement.
13. Ms X stayed at the care home intermittently from 1 December 2017 but only took up permanent residence on 25 April 2018.
14. Ms X says the shower was out of order in her en-suite and she agreed to use the communal facilities until the care home repaired the shower.
15. The Care Home applied an uplift to all residents’ care charges on 7 May 2018. This increased Ms X’s costs to £975 per week.
16. On 15 July 2018, the care home moved Ms X to a room without a shower while it completed repair works on her shower. The care home has confirmed its standard cost for this room was £980 per week.
17. Ms X instructed a solicitor to write to the care home on 30 July 2018. The solicitors letter said:
• The care home was in breach of its contract with Ms X as it failed to provide her with an en-suite bathroom as contracted and failed to provide her with storage for her mobility scooter.
• Ms X asked for a rebate of 50% of the contracted price she had paid and 50% off future fees until the care home fixed her shower and provided storage for her mobility scooter.
18. Ms X’s solicitors chased for a response on 11 September 2018.
19. The Care Home produced monthly invoices up to 1 September 2018 covering charges in advance up to the end of the month. Ms X paid each invoice through direct debit covering her charges up to 30 September 2018.
20. On 30 October 2018, the care home repaired the shower in Ms X’s en-suite.
21. The Care Home under-charged Ms X in October 2018 and November 2018 by £3,000 per month in each month. Ms X paid the invoices the care home produced.
22. Ms X gave notice to end her contract with the care home on 1 November 2018. The care home sent a letter to Ms X on 1 November 2018 confirming receipt of Ms X’s notice. The care home offered Ms X an extension to her notice period beyond 28 November 2018 to allow her longer to move out.
23. On 15 November 2018, the Care Home issued a catch-up bill of £6,000 for the under-charges in October 2018 and November 2018. The Care Home produced a further bill on 1 December 2018 covering all charges up to 31 December 2018 of £4236.61.
24. Ms X moved out of the Care Home on 23 December 2018. Ms X’s belongings remained in the Care Home until 29 December 2018.
25. Ms X paid these charges before reclaiming £10,236.61 through her bank. The Care Home reversed the January 2019 charges and removed the deposit of £1820 from the balance owed finalising Ms X’s account at £8,416.61 owed.
26. Ms X’s solicitors chased for a response on 7 May 2019.
27. Ms X raised a complaint directly with the care home on 28 June 2019. On 8 July 2019, the care home promised to respond within 28 days but later changed this deadline to 2 September 2019.
28. The care home provided its stage 1 response on 2 September 2019, it advised:
• It could not locate any agreement to erect a shelter for Ms X’s mobility scooter.
• It accepted there was a conversation that Ms X would prefer a shelter for her scooter. But the care home provided storage inside the lodge instead.
• There was an outstanding balance owed of £8,416.61.
• The care home would offer a reduction of £1,500 given the difficulties Ms X had experienced with her shower.
29. Ms X responded on 5 October 2019 disputing the care home completed repairs on 30 October 2018, disputing she owed any balance and advised the care home owed her a deposit of £1,820.
30. The care home provided its second stage response on 12 November 2019. It upheld its findings but offered a £2,000 reduction instead of a £1,500 reduction.
31. On 6 December 2019, Ms X disputed this award and advised the care home needed to refund her deposit. The care home advised the £2,000 was in addition to the deposit refund on payment of the outstanding balance.
32. Ms X requested a response at Stage 3 of the complaint process on 14 January 2020.
33. On 21 January 2020, the care home promised it would provide its stage 3 response within 20 days.
34. On 14 February 2020, the care home provided its final stage 3 response. The care home said:
• It did not provide the en-suite facilities with Ms X’s room as promised.
• It apologised the mobility scooter storage facilities were not as Ms X had expected. But it said the home kept the scooter secure and charged.
• It accepted delays in communication with Ms X and her solicitors.
• It said that £8,416.41 remaining outstanding for Ms X to pay but offered the £2,000 reduction.
35. The care home applied the £2,000 reduction to Ms X’s account reducing the balance owed to £6,416.41. The Care Home explained it offered this reduction of £1,500 to reflect the delays in repair of the shower and £500 for poor communication.

Analysis

Contract and Room Costs

36. When a Care Home contracts to provide a particular service to a person, the Care Home should provide this service at the agreed cost.
37. The Care Home has not disputed that it failed to provide Ms X with her contracted room because of a fault with the en-suite shower facility. The failure to provide this contracted service to Ms X is fault.
38. Ms X was unaware of this issue from December 2017 to April 2018 as she had not moved into the room. While it is likely the shower was faulty at this time, this caused no injustice since Ms X was not aware of the problem.
39. The Care Home moved Ms X into a different room without an en-suite shower facility from April 2018 until the end of October 2018. This caused an injustice to Ms X through the inconvenience of not having access to her contracted en-suite shower.
40. The Ombudsman would normally look to provide Ms X with the difference in costs between Ms X’s contracted room and the cost of a room in the same care home without an en-suite shower. The Ombudsman might also look to provide an added award for the inconvenience caused. However, Ms X paid £975 per week for her contracted room while the average cost for a room without an en-suite shower in the Care Home was £980 per week. Therefore, there is no financial disadvantage to address between the cost of the room Ms X contracted for and the cost of her temporary room.
41. The Care Home has already applied a reduction of £1,500 to Ms X’s outstanding balance to reflect the time it took for it to complete the shower repairs in Ms X’s contracted room. I would consider that a reduction of this amount is suitable to reflect the inconvenience caused.

Mobility Scooter Contract

42. Ms X says the care home agreed to build a shelter with charging facility for her mobility scooter. The care home says it did not agree to build a shelter. It says it agreed to ensure Ms X’s scooter was secure and charged.
43. I have seen no evidence the care home promised to build a shelter for Ms X’s mobility scooter. While the care home could not provide me with a copy of Ms X’s contract, the standard contract form does not include an option for the provision of mobility scooter services or shelters.
44. Without evidence to support the care home did not provide an agreed on contracted service I would not find fault.

Billing

45. A Care Home is entitled to charge for the service it provides at the contracted cost. Ms X contracted to pay £910 per week, rising to £975 per week in May 2018.
46. The Care Home has provided me with evidence that it charged the correct contracted cost from 12 December 2017 through to 31 December 2018. The billing correctly reflects these charges.
47. However, Ms X has provided evidence she handed in her notice to leave the Care Home on 1 November 2018. Ms X also provided evidence the Care Home confirmed that Ms X’s notice period ended on 28 November 2018. This letter from the Care Home offered an extension to Ms X’s notice period so she could move out “safely and comfortably”.
48. Had Ms X left the Care Home shortly after the end of her notice period, I would not expect the Care Home to charge for this period. However, Ms X moved out on 23 December 2018, followed by her belongings on 29 December 2018. Since Ms X continued to stay at the care home for a significant duration following her notice period ending it is to be expected that the Care Home would continue charging.
49. The Care Home offered to remove the charges applied after 23 December 2018, reducing the balance owed by seven days’ worth of charges. I would consider that a reduction of this amount is reflective of the circumstances of Ms X’s vacation of her room.

Complaints Procedure

50. The Care Home’s complaints procedure confirms that a person should receive a response to their complaint at each stage within 20 working days.
51. The Care Home failed to meet these timescales at every stage of the complaints process.
52. I have seen no evidence of responses from the Care Home to the complaints raised by Ms X’s solicitors in July 2018, September 2018 and May 2019. This is fault causing an unnecessary delay in handling Ms X’s complaint and is demonstrative of a systematic failure to acknowledge or respond to complaints.
53. The Care Home sent a response to the Stage 1 complaint 5 weeks over the timescales in its complaints procedure. A response to the Stage 2 complaint 1 week over the timescales in its complaints procedure. And, a response to the Stage 3 complaint 3 working days over the timescales in its complaints procedure. This is fault causing further inconvenience to Ms X through delays in handling her complaint.
54. The Care Home as already applied a reduction to Ms X’s outstanding balance of £500 to reflect its poor communication. I would consider this reduction is suitable in the circumstances of Ms X’s complaint.
55. However, the Care Home should provide training to its members of staff about complaint handling. This is to ensure the care home does not ignore complaints and provides responses in line with the timescales outlined in its complaints procedure.

Agreed action

56. Within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Care Home should:
• apply a reduction to Ms X’s outstanding balance for seven days’ worth of charges to reflect the overcharge for the period 24 December 2018 to 31 December 2018.
57. Within three months of the Ombudsman’s final decision the Care Home should:
• provide training to its members of staff about complaint handling. This is to ensure the care home does not ignore complaints and provides responses in line with the timescales outlined in its complaints procedure.

Back to top

Final decision

58. There was fault by the Care Home. As the Care Home has agreed to my recommendation I have completed my investigation as the injustice has been suitably remedied.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman