• 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 Mrs Y’s complaint, made on behalf of Mrs X, about Mrs X’s residential care. The care provider has offered a remedy for the matters complained of which is in line with the remedy we would have recommended had we investigated. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint about the care provider’s complaint-handling process because we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X has lived permanently in her current care home since June 2021. Her relative Mrs Y complains on her behalf that:
   • 1. there was a period when a lack of appropriate care was provided to Mrs X at the home;
     2. the care provider delayed in dealing with the complaint due to absence of senior staff.
2. Mrs Y says Mrs X was not sufficiently encouraged to wash and moisturise so developed sores and inflamed skin on her feet and legs. The problem was identified by the family about a month after Mrs X had moved to the home. This condition caused pain and distress to Mrs X, which in turn caused distress to her family. Mrs Y wants the remedy offered by the care firm to be increased, and for staff availability to be improved.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs Y, the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code, and the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The care provider has offered a £1,450 refund, which is about 25 percent of Mrs X’s monthly care home fees. It says this is a reimbursement of a month’s worth of the total fee’s care element. The care provider considers the fee refund reflects the period of about three to four weeks it took for Mrs X’s conditions to heal. It has also offered a £500 acknowledgement payment for the distress caused to the family.
6. Mrs Y believes the fee refund part of the remedy should be calculated using the five‑month period from when Mrs X went into the home to the end of a safeguarding investigation, or the three-month duration of the care home’s complaint process.
7. Neither the care provider’s nor Mrs Y’s proposals use periods which are directly related to the time when the care home’s service to Mrs X led to her core injustice of foot and leg problems. But the duration used for the care provider’s remedy offer does reflect the approximate month-long period when that service was not properly provided to her. This was the first part of Mrs X’s stay at the care home, until the family reported those problems to staff in July.
8. The care home’s remedy for the fees refund, and the £500 for the distress the matter caused to the family, is a proportionate and appropriate outcome. It is in line with the remedy we would have sought, had it not already been offered. We will not investigate where the body in jurisdiction has made such an offer because investigation of the complaint would not lead to a different outcome.
9. Mrs Y says the care provider’s complaint process was affected by senior staff members’ absences overlapping. Where we are not investigating the core issue which gave rise to the complaint, we will not investigate a care provider’s complaint-handling process in isolation. It is not a good use of our resources for us to do so. This limitation applies here, so we will not pursue this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
    • investigation would not lead to a different outcome;
    • we will not investigate a care provider’s complaint-handling process in isolation when we are not investigating the core complaint issue.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page