Summary: Ms C complained about the care and support her mother received at her care home. The Ombudsman decided to discontinue his investigation, because the care provider offered an appropriate remedy, which the complainant accepted, before the investigation was completed.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms C, complained to us on behalf of her mother, whom I shall call Ms M. Ms C complained that:
• Within one week of arrival, the care home told her that it would not be able to meet her mother’s needs.
• The care home failed to inform her, before she chose the home, that under certain circumstances the home will have to put one to one support in place, for which there will be a significant additional charge.
• The care home failed to provide the support and time needed to ensure a new resident with Alzheimer/Dementia, in this case her mother, was able to settle down.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information I received from Ms C and the care provider. I shared a copy of my draft decision statement with Ms C and the care provider, and considered any comments I received before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms C complained to us about the care and support her mother received while she was at Beechville care home. Ms M moved into the care home in May 2019, on a permanent basis. However, she moved to another home less than three weeks later.
6. Ms C complained that:
• Within one week of her mother’s arrival, the care home told her that it would not be able to meet her mother’s needs. Ms C says that if the home was unable to meet her mother’s needs, it should not have told her (before her mother went into the home) that it could meet her needs, without raising any issues. As such, Ms C believes the care home failed to carry out a proper pre-admission assessment, before the care home agreed to accept her mother as a new resident.
• The care home failed to tell her, before she chose the care home, that: under certain circumstances the home will have to put one to one support in place for a resident, for which there will be a significant additional charge. This was not in line with the Competition and Markets Authority Guidance: UK care home providers for older people – advice on consumer law. The home should have included this in its Contract or Terms & Conditions.
• The care home failed to provide the support and time needed to ensure a new resident with Alzheimer/Dementia, in this case her mother, was able to settle down. Ms C told me she believed there was insufficient staff around to provide the support needed.
7. The care provider told Ms C, in response to her complaint, that:
• The care home understands that new dementia residents need extra time and support to settle in a new environment.
• However, it became clear that Ms M needed one to one support due to her behaviour and her levels of agitation. While the care home is not understaffed, it does not have enough staff to be able to provide full time one to one support to an individual resident throughout the day. The care home therefore relies on an outside care agency to come into the home and provide this. This level of care support is not part of the standard care support residents receive. As such, the resident must pay for this additional expense.
• The care home contacted the Community Mental Health Team, who came to assess Ms M. Following their visit, the care home decided that it would not be able to meet Ms M’s needs.
8. The one to one support remained in place until Ms M left. The additional cost of eleven days one to one daytime support was £1,272. Ms C has told me that she believes her mother should not have to pay for this.
9. In response to my enquiry letter, the care provider offered to repay the £1,272 and wave half of the invoice Ms M has to pay for the care she received while she stayed at the home. Ms M has accepted this as a satisfactory outcome of her complaint.

Back to top

Agreed Action

10. The care provider should, within four weeks of my decision, pay for the one to one support, and refund half of the care home fees Ms M paid to the care provider.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I decided to discontinue my investigation, because an appropriate remedy has been offered and accepted during the course of the investigation.
12. Under the terms of our Memorandum of Understanding with the Care Quality Commission, I have sent it a copy of my final decision statement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman