Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Care Provider increasing Mrs Y’s fees. Investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Care Provider:
• raised his mother’s (Mrs Y’s) fees in a way that is in conflict with the terms of business;
• did not communicate the changes in a clear, fair and unambiguous way; and
• failed to respond when he raised concerns.
2. Mr X said this resulted in an increase of more than £4,850 yearly, in addition to a substantial increase that occurred in April 2025. Mr X said the Care Provider’s actions made it difficult for him to carry out his role as attorney, and caused distress to Mrs Y. Mr X wanted the Care Provider to acknowledge fault, make assurances for future reviews and reduce Mrs Y’s fees.

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 the complainant and the Care Provider.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The strict interpretation of a contract is for the courts. However, we can look at a contract on ordinary reading and examine how it appears to the reasonable member of the public. Where information provided to the person about their care fees is clear and a fee increase has been applied across the board to all self-funders, we would not normally find fault in fees being increased.
7. Mrs Y signed the Care Provider’s terms of business in early 2023. These explained what her fees were at the time and also said “fees are subject to review from time to time”. While the terms did not go on to provide more information, such as examples of when or how often this might happen, it was not ambiguous and made clear there could be fee increases in future. It was open to Mrs Y and her attorneys to query the terms at that time.
8. When the Care Provider decided to make an increase to its self-funding residents’ fees in early 2025, it notified them in writing with at least four weeks’ notice. When it made a decision in mid-2025 to increase the fees further, it notified residents in writing with three months’ notice.
9. Nothing in the terms of business prevented the Care Provider from increasing its fees, and care providers are entitled to do so when their costs increase. On an ordinary reading, the Care Provider did not act in conflict with the terms as signed by Mrs Y.
10. The Care Provider gave sufficient notice when it raised the fees to enable people to consider alternative placements, in line with the Care Quality Commission’s guidance. This says at Regulation 19 (fees) “Providers must notify people of any changes to their terms and conditions, including increases in fees and give them sufficient time to consider whether they wish to continue with the service”. The Care Provider explained the reasons for the increases on both occasions, which related to increases in the cost of providing the service. It responded to Mrs Y’s attorney’s concerns with further explanation of the increases.
11. If we investigated this complaint, it is not likely we would decide the Care Provider had been at fault and should therefore reduce Mrs Y’s fees. Investigation by us would not therefore achieve a different outcome, so we will not investigate this complaint. It remains open to Mr X to seek legal advice about pursuing a private law dispute, should he seek strict interpretation of the terms of the contract between Mrs Y and the Care Provider.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because doing so is not likely to achieve a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman