Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the actions of his mother’s, Mrs C’s Care Provider. This is because further investigation could not provide a different outcome to that already given or make a finding of the kind Mr B wants.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained his mother’s Mrs C’s Care Provider increased its fees by 10% without giving a full explanation of the increases, falsified the date on letters advising of the increase and gave no explanation for the wrong date. The Care Provider terminated Mrs C’s placement and she is now residing in a new home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 we could add to any previous investigation by the care provider, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B(8) and (9))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Care Provider.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr B queried the increase in the cost of Mrs C’s care fees. The Care Provider wrote to Mr B explaining the reasons for the fee increase were because:
6. The UK Government brought out a new law requiring vaccination as a condition of employment in the adult social care. This required us to pay for consultation to arrange several meetings to inform staff how the new law would affect their employment at the home.

The Additional expenditure also include:

• The immense increase in inflation to living costs, such as Electricity, Food, Petrol etc.
• Extensive quality of training for Management and staff throughout the ongoing Covid 19 Pandemic.
• Recruitment of extra staff
• Home improvements/Maintenance to ensure all our residents have a safe and comfortable place to call home.
• Our fees continue to be at a competitive rate in comparison to a same sized quality residential home in the area.

7. Mr B complained to the Care Provider that the fee increase did not stack up and requested a detailed breakdown of the increase. The Care Provider said it was sorry Mr B felt this way but could not change the facts set out in the letter. We could not add to this. The Care Provider has explained the reasons for the 10% fee increase we could achieve no more even if we investigated.
8. Mr B queried the dates on letters received and complained the Care Provider had falsified records. Mr B says he received an email on 15 December reminding him to complete and sign a copy of the fee increase agreement but emailed to say he knew nothing of the fee increase. He was sent a further email entitled ‘reattaching the Fee increase letter sent on 24 November’. However, when he received the original copy on 18 December the same letter was dated 30 November. The Care Provider apologised for the error. It said this was an unintentional human error. It reduced Mrs C’s January 2022 payment, so it did not include the fee increase given the late notification of increase in care fees. We could achieve no more even if wee investigated and could not add to this point.
9. The Care Provider gave Mrs C 28 days ‘Notice to Quit’. It explained the reasons were because it had received emails making it clear there was no trust in the management teams abilities. It said it offered the use of a mediator, but this was declined. Given the impact the lack of trust had on the management team it felt it had no other option. We could not add to this point.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because we could not make a different finding even if we investigated.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman