Summary: Ms X complains YourLife (Droitwich) failed to meet her father’s (Mr Y’s) needs when he went to live in Horton Mill Court in July 2021 and told his family he had to leave, resulting in him having to live in a care home and incurring losses selling his flat. The care provider accepts it did not deal with Mr Y and the family’s complaints properly, resulting in financial losses. It has offered to recompense them for those losses and to apologise to Ms X. The care provider’s actions have caused injustice which will be remedied by the action it has offered to take.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, complains YourLife (Droitwich) failed to meet her father’s needs when he went to live in Horton Mill Court in July 2021 and told his family he had to leave, resulting in him having to live in a care home and incurring losses selling his flat.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about adult social care providers and decide whether their actions have caused an injustice, or could have caused injustice, to the person making the complaint or others. I have used the term fault to describe such actions. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 34B and 34C)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Ms X;
• discussed the complaint with Ms X;
• considered the comments the care provider has provided;
• considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies; and
• shared a draft of this statement with Ms X and the care provider, and taken account of the comments received.

Back to top

What I found

Key facts

4. Horton Mill Court is a retirement development comprising flats for people aged 70 and over. It is managed by McCarthy Stone’s managing agents Yourlife Management Services Ltd. YourLife (Droitwich) provides bespoke “independent lifestyle support services” for those who need it at Horton Mill Court. McCarthy Stone’s website says this can include help with:
• cleaning/laundry
• personal care (e.g. washing, continence, medication)
• accessing the community (e.g. medical appointments, social events, shopping)
5. I refer to McCarthy Stone, Yourlife Management Services Ltd and YourLife (Droitwich) collectively as “the care provider”.
6. Ms X’s father, Mr Y, started the process of buying a flat from an existing resident in December 2021. The care provider assessed Mr Y and satisfied itself he could live independently, a requirement for anyone living there.
7. The process of buying the flat was slow. It was finally ready to go ahead in July 2022. By that time Mr Y had a diagnosis of dementia and was receiving two calls a day to help with medication and prompts with washing, dressing and eating.
8. Ms X contacted the care provider two weeks before the purchase was due to complete to let it know about the change in her father’s circumstances. The care provider told Ms X it should be able to meet the needs she had described and set up a package of care within three days of Mr Y’s arrival.
9. Mr Y moved into his flat at Horton Mill Court on 18 July. Ms X and a sibling supported him there until 23 July.
10. On the morning of 24 July Mr Y was unwell and had a fall. Ms X says she learned about the fall when her sibling visited their father on 25 July. Ms X returned to stay with her father, as he had a medical appointment on 26 July.
11. On 27 July Mr Y was diagnosed with COVID-19, which meant he had to remain in isolation for 10 days. Ms X visited her father each day. Ms X says she was upset by the care provider’s attitude towards her father and his care needs, and a lack of understanding of his diagnosis.
12. Mr Y had further falls. Ms X says it was unclear what support the care provider was providing for her father. She says it told her staff found him “spooky” as he was often staring into space.
13. The care provider contacted Ms X in the early hours of 7 August as her father was missing. When Ms X arrived at Horton Mill Court 40 minutes later, the care provider said it had looked around the corridors and communal areas but could not find Mr Y. Ms X called the Police. Having been missing for four hours, Mr Y was found in the flat opposite his, which had been left open for care staff to get in. Ms X returned in the afternoon and took her father out for lunch. She took him back to his flat at 18.30. At 21.30 the care provider called Ms X and told her she either had to stay with her father or he had to leave, as he could not stay in his flat on his own. Ms X collected her father and took him to her home.
14. On 12 August Ms X arranged for her father to stay in a care home for respite care, while they agreed a plan for him to return to his flat.
15. In September Mr Y decided he did not want to return to Horton Mill Court and would remain in the care home.
16. Mr Y’s family arranged a meeting with the care provider for 7 October, but when they arrived they were told the meeting had been cancelled. Ms X then made a formal complaint to the care provider via its website.
17. The family had a meeting with the care provider on 11 November. It agreed to investigate their concerns. When they did not hear anything for seven months, they contacted the care provider again.
18. In October 2023 the care provider thanked Ms X for her patience while it looked into her concerns. It offered to credit Mr Y’s account with two months’ worth of service charge payments. It said this was in recognition of the time which had passed since the meeting in November 2022. It told Ms X it was difficult to respond to her specific concerns because of staff changes. It said it would not agree to write off all the service charges, as they were a condition of the lease and of benefit to the development as a whole.
19. The care provider says it has made, or is in the process making, changes since Mr Y left Horton Mill Court, including:
• Reviewing and changing its complaints procedure;
• Ensuring assessments take place when necessary;
• Introducing improved technology to help document and record information;
• Addressing the shortfalls in the handling of the family’s complaint; and
• The introduction of dementia wellbeing champions across its developments, evidencing specific investment and focus in this area of training.

Did the care provider’s actions cause injustice?

20. The care provider accepts it should have reassessed Mr Y, given that it took eight months between the first assessment and completing the purchase of the flat. It also accepts it did not handle the family’s complaint properly. It has offered to make a payment towards any losses the family incurred. It has also offered to apologise to Mr Y’s family for the problems it caused, including:
• the failure to reassess Mr Y in July 2021;
• the failure to attend the meeting in November 2021; and
• the failure to deal properly with their complaint.

I am satisfied this will remedy the injustice to Mr Y and his family.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have completed my investigation on the basis the care provider’s actions caused injustice which will be remedied by the action it has offered to take.
22. Under the terms of our Memorandum of Understanding and information sharing agreement with the Care Quality Commission, I will send it a copy of my final decision statement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman