Recent statements in this category are shown below:
Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 10-Aug-2017
Summary: The Council acted without fault when deciding an elderly resident could move to sheltered accommodation with a care package rather than to a residential home. It examined concerns about the care package without fault also.
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 09-Aug-2017
Summary: The care provider correctly charged for the care it provided to Mr B. It should have referred Mr X to the Ombudsman after it considered his complaint about this matter. This did not cause Mr X injustice as he did complain. The care provider should review its procedures to ensure its complaints procedure is available to clients and complainants are referred to the Ombudsman.
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 04-Aug-2017
Summary: The Council agreed to reduce the amount of Mr X's care charges by the amount it could reasonably calculate had been overcharged. It now requires the care agency (Aquaflo, which acted on its behalf) to log its care calls electronically to avoid future errors in charging. However, the Council remains responsible for the agency's actions in overcharging. It has now agreed to acknowledge the distress caused to Mr X by the receipt of the incorrect bills by an additional payment.
Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 03-Aug-2017
Summary: Essex Senior Care Ltd trading as Home Instead did not cause injustice by allegedly failing to sensitively handle complaints against a client although it did not provide the full month's review period it had offered due to staffing difficulties.
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 25-Jul-2017
Summary: The Care Provider caused Mr X injustice when it failed to complete tasks as agreed. It also did not deal with his complaint effectively. It will waive £1,000 of the outstanding care costs and take action to avoid similar problems in future.
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 24-Jul-2017
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the standard of car received by the complainant's mother from a home care provider. This is because there is nothing further that we could add to the investigation by the care provider.
Statement Not upheld Domiciliary care 13-Jul-2017
Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how Interserve Healthcare reached its decision that it could not provide morning and evening care to Mr Z if it did not provide overnight care
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 11-Jul-2017
Summary: There is no evidence that Mrs X was caused significant or lasting injustice by the way in which the care agency (acting on behalf of the Council) delivered her care. The care agency reimbursed some fees. The Council did not commission a package to include companionship but sought to ensure that eligible need was fulfilled in other ways.
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 07-Jul-2017
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs A's complaint about the way the Council considered a safeguarding investigation into the care of her mother, Mrs B, who has since died. This is because the Ombudsman could not add to the Council's investigation or make a different finding even if he investigated.
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 04-Jul-2017
Summary: The Council was responsible for the actions of a care worker providing care to Mr Y on its behalf. It agreed to repay Mr Y the £5,500 that a care worker has been convicted of stealing from him. The Council also agreed to pay Mr Y £200 to reflect the time and trouble involved in bringing the complaint.