Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the level of fees charged for a residential placement. This is because we are unlikely to find fault causing injustice with the actions of the Care Provider.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs M, says that the Care Provider at the residential placement where her father lives:
• Has refused to honour an agreed price freeze for her father’s care fees;
• Told her that if she didn’t accept the charges it was making, her father would have to leave the placement, and this was not reasonable during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered the information provided by Mrs M and the Care Provider. I have also sent Mrs M a draft decision for her comments.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs M’s father, F is resident at a care home. In November 2019 Mrs M gave notice that F intended to move to a home which could offer a cheaper weekly fee.
5. The Care Provider in response offered to charge a lower rate than it was charging F’s at the time. It said it was also offering to the freeze the fee increase due in April 2020.
6. Mrs M came back with a counter offer, quoting a slightly lower rate offered by another home, and the Care Provider agreed to match it in an email to Mrs M. She agreed that F would remain at the home on that basis..
7. In March 2020 the Care Provider sent Mrs M a letter notifying her of its April price increase. Mrs M protested that a price freeze had been agreed, but the Care Provider responded that the original offer was an alternative. It said it offered the price cut and also the fee freeze as an alternative, but not both. It further pointed out no fee freeze was mentioned in the final agreement, which reduced the cost still further.
8. Mrs M complained. She said that was not her understanding, and that F may need to give notice if the agreement that she understood to be made was not fulfilled. However, the Care Provider refused to back down and stated if that was the case, F would have to leave the placement.
9. Mrs M made an additional complaint of unfairness in expecting F to move home during the Covid-19 pandemic.
10. Mrs M has now brought her complaint to the LGSCO, and I have considered whether there was fault by the Care Provider.
11. The central points are whether the Care Provider’s email of 11 November intended the fee freeze to be in addition to the lower rate being offered, and whether the email exchange of 14 November implied acceptance of the fee freeze as well as the lower offer.
12. In the Care Provider’s offer of 11 November, I do not think it is clear whether the “also” was meant as an alternative to the fee reduction, or as an addition. It is on a separate line of the email, but I feel it could be interpreted either way.
13. However, Mrs M declined the offer on 14 November and requested a lower weekly fee, to meet that offered by another provider. She made no mention of a proposed freeze to the fee increase planned for April 2020. Her offer was limited to the weekly fee increase.
14. The Care Provider responded on the same date accepting the counteroffer. Again there was no mention of a price freeze.
15. Consequently, whilst I regard Mrs M’s interpretation of the original email as offering a freeze in addition to a cut in the weekly rate, to be plausible, I do not concur with her belief that the freeze offer was attached to the final agreement. The emails exchanged on 14 November supersede the original offer, and neither of them mention the idea of a fee freeze. The Care Provider cannot be bound to something that is not in the agreement reached.
16. On the second point of the complaint, I am also not persuaded there was fault by the Care Provider. It was Mrs M’s suggestion that she may need to remove F in the circumstances, so I do not regard it as fault for the Care Provider to accept what she had said.

Back to top

Final decision

17. Subject to any comments Mrs M might make, my view is we should not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault causing injustice in the actions of the Care Provider.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman