• The complaint
• The Ombudsman’s role and powers
• How I considered this complaint
• My assessment
• Final decision

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the quality of residential care and the Care Provider’s response when Miss X raised concerns. This is because the Care Provider has already provided a suitable remedy and there is nothing further we could achieve.

The complaint

1. Miss X says the Care Provider did not provide a sufficient standard of residential care to her late mother, Mrs Y, resulting in her admission to hospital with sepsis. Miss X complained to the Care Provider in May 2020 but says it did not respond and then billed her for care costs in late 2020, after her mother had passed away. Miss X says this has caused significant distress and still impacts her daily life. She is seeking an explanation of the issues raised about her mother’s care and an apology.

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)
3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe the action has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and Guidance on Remedies.

Back to top

My assessment

Quality of care

6. Mrs Y moved into the care home in December 2016 and remained in the home until May 2020 when she was admitted hospital. Mrs Y did not return to the care of the Care Provider following this and passed away in July 2020.
7. In May 2020, Miss X complained to the Care Provider and separately raised safeguarding concerns with the Council about the care provided to Mrs Y in the weeks before her hospital admission. The Care Provider investigated these concerns and produced a report of its findings on 3 June 2020, including five recommendations which were:

• Where a resident is known to have a known history of constipation, there should be a care plan in place for this issue.
• Where a resident is known to have a known history of anxiety, there should be a care plan in place for this issue.
• Fluids administered should be documented on fluid balance charts as soon as possible following the fluids being administered.
• Significant events should be documented in daily notes as soon as possible after the event has occurred and appropriately timed. It is important to ensure all significant events are appropriately recorded.
• Where a resident has reluctance to take food or fluids, a care plan should be in place and best interest decisions meetings held with appropriate professionals.

8. The Care Provider says it shared its findings with the Council which found the Care Provider’s investigation to be satisfactory and did not seek any further action. These recommendations address the issues raised about quality of care that may be in the wider public interest for us to investigate. The Care Provider has also waived Mrs Y’s outstanding care fees of £3225. This is a suitable remedy for any injustice caused to the family. Therefore, it is unlikely we could achieve anything further for Miss X by investigating this part of the complaint about quality of care.

Handling of complaint and communication with Miss X

9. The Care Provider says it did not share its investigation report with Miss X because this formed part of the Council’s safeguarding investigation. The Care Provider says it was precluded from discussing the case with Miss X or its staff at the time, and expected the Council to share its investigation outcomes with Miss X. The Care Provider says we can now share a copy of its report with Miss X.
10. In late 2020, the Care Provider billed Miss X for outstanding care costs for Mrs Y. Miss X contacted the Care Provider on 10 December 2020 to query why it had contacted her about these costs but not responded to her complaint. The Care Provider responded on 17 December 2020 to explain it had previously investigated and shared information with the Council, and that it would waive the fees.
11. Miss X also received an email from the care home manager on 31 December 2020 to apologise for the lack of response to the May 2020 complaint. The care home manager said they would update Miss X once they had more information from the Council. Miss X says she did not hear anything further from them following this.
12. The Care Provider has waived Mrs Y’s outstanding care fees and so provided a suitable remedy for any injustice caused to the family. It is unlikely we could achieve anything further for Miss X by investigating this part of the complaint about the Care Provider’s handling of the complaint itself. Further, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate concerns about complaint handling in isolation when we are not investigating the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Care Provider has already provided a suitable remedy and there is nothing further we could achieve.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page