Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the way a care agency, acting on behalf of the Council, delivered Ms X’s home care, and no fault in the way it, or the Council responded to her complaints about this.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the service she received from a domiciliary care agency, acting on behalf of the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where a care provider is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of the provider. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

• considered information submitted by Ms X;
• considered correspondence exchanged between Ms X, the care agency, and the Council;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the responses;
• considered relevant legislation;
• offered Ms X and the Council an opportunity to comment on a draft of this document.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation

5. The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 set out the fundamental standards those registered to provide care services must achieve. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has issued guidance on how to meet the fundamental standards below which care must never fall.

Background to Ms X’s complaint

6. Ms X complains about the domiciliary care package she received from a care agency between 13 & 30 May 2024. The care agency was commissioned and funded by the Council; therefore, the Council is responsible for the actions of the care agency.
7. Ms X says there was a lack of communication between the Council and the care agency, and between her and the care agency. She says the required tasks/visits were not being completed in accordance with her needs. She says that when a manager from the care agency visited her at home to participate in a meeting to try to resolve the issues, she (care manager) was defensive, raised her voice and gaslit Ms X, which caused Ms X to experience panic attacks.

Information from the Council

8. The Council completed a support plan for Ms X on 1 May 2024, which breaks down the support, which is as follows:

• “Lunch 30 mins - prepare lunch and a meal for [Ms X] to have later in the day when she wakes up, laundry if required.
• 2 hours per week domestic visit to support with tidying, cleaning and laundry for the first 3 weeks
• After 3 weeks, 1 hour per week will be allocated to help with domestic and laundry tasks”.

9. I have had sight of daily care records between 13 & 30 May 2024. These show there were occasions Ms X refused support, cancelled visits and on one occasion asked a carer to take a mattress outside, which the carer was unable to do. Carers reported increasing levels of laundry and/or clutter in the home, which they had insufficient time to deal with. Ms X increasingly refused personal care and wanted the carers to focus on domestic tasks, which was not in accordance with the care plan.
10. Ms X contacted the Council to report her dissatisfaction with the carers. A social worker contacted the care agency on 28 May 2024, to inform it of the complaint and asked it to arrange a meeting with Ms X, which the social worker would attend.
11. A meeting at Ms X’s home took place on 30 May 2024. Ms X’s social worker was present, along with a member of staff from the care agency. I have had sight of the notes of the visit, The care agency said its carers could not undertake all domestic tasks requested, that it accepted the service based on the care plan, of which domestic tasks were a small part. Ms X was asking care staff to undertake tasks not on the care plan, for example, cleaning a cat litter tray.
12. The care package was terminated by the Council at Ms X’s request on 30 May 2024.
13. Ms X submitted a formal complaint to the care agency. She received a response by email on 7 May 2024. The author of the email explained the steps she had taken to investigate the complaint and set out her findings. The author concluded by saying, “I am sorry that the care package was not to your expectations. I know your main wishes were for cleaning and decluttering your home. Unfortunately we are a care company and not a cleaning company and we accepted this package to cover your care needs”.
14. Ms X contacted the Council on 7 June 2024 and provided a copy of the care agency’s complaint response. The Council responded in writing on 11 June 2024, saying it considered the care agency’s complaint investigation and response sufficient.

Analysis

15. Based on the comments from Ms Y and the care agency, there are clearly different positions and expectations. Complaints about verbal conversations, tone and attitude are difficult to investigate. I was not there or involved in the discussion in any way. Therefore, I am reliant on any available surrounding evidence that may provide any information about the issues being complained about.
16. I am unable to come to a finding on conversations Ms X had with a manager from the care agency for the reasons set out above. In respect of Ms X’s allegation about a care manager’s conduct at a meeting on 30 May 2024, I find no fault. The records of the meeting, which was attended by a social worker, do not support Ms X’s claim that the manager was rude, or that she (manager) was asked to leave by a social worker.
17. I cannot find fault with the care agency in the way it dealt with Ms X’s care. Her expectations did not align with the care & support plan.
18. The care agency conducted a satisfactory investigation into Ms X’s complaint and provided an adequate complaint response. The Council could not add to this.

Back to top

Final decision

19. There is no evidence of fault in the way a care agency, acting on behalf of the Council, delivered Ms X’s home care, and no fault in the way it, or the Council responded to her complaints about this.
20. It is on this basis; the complaint will be closed.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman