New adult social care complaint decisions

A weekly update on adult social care complaint decisions

Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case.

  • London Borough of Hounslow (23 016 007)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr Y, on behalf of his brother, complained the Council delayed completing two safeguarding investigations. Both investigations took longer than the normal timescales. One took over 15 months to complete and the other was delayed by two months. This is fault and a suitable remedy is agreed.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (23 018 715)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: There was fault by the Council because it delayed carrying out an annual review of Mr K’s care. The Council has agreed our remedies for the injustice. There is no evidence of unremedied injustice about Mr K’s long term plan, and about carers support for Mrs K.

  • Orchard Carehomes Limited (24 004 209)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Care Provider not paying him fully for the value of his wife Mrs X’s property lost during her stay at their care home, or how it dealt with his complaint. It is unlikely investigation would lead to a different outcome. There is not enough evidence of fault in how Care Provider applied the residence contract terms to warrant an investigation. We do not investigate providers’ complaint-handling where we are not investigating the matters which gave rise to the complaint.

  • Bee Home Care Limited (24 009 200)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care support at home. This is because the Care Provider’s actions do not cause a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement.

  • Devon County Council (24 010 430)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue a blue badge. That is because the complaint is late.

  • Lancashire County Council (24 011 461)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s financial assessment for adult social care fees. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation and it is unlikely that an investigation by us would lead to a different outcome.

  • Leicester City Council (24 006 372)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr Y’s care provision. There is not enough evidence of fault in relation to some parts of Mrs X’s complaint and of the parts remaining, it would be reasonable to allow the Council to conclude its safeguarding investigation.

  • Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (24 006 849)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement in the late Mrs Y’s social care. Part of the complaint is late without good enough reason to investigate it now. We cannot achieve anything meaningful now regarding Mrs Y’s care and the family’s involvement when Mrs Y was alive. Some points are more appropriately for the Information Commissioner. The Council has now replied to Mr X’s complaint, so we need not ask it to reply. If Mr X believes the Council is demanding the wrong amount for Mrs Y’s care, he can argue that point if the Council takes the estate to court.

  • The ExtraCare Charitable Trust (24 015 185)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 07-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the outcome of a Care Provider’s investigation into visitor conduct. This is because we could not add to its previous investigation or achieve the outcome he wants.

  • Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council (23 019 988)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his father, Mr Y’s, care and support needs. We have found fault because the Council did not explain a delay in completing a reassessment of Mr Y’s needs in 2024. This caused avoidable distress and frustration to Mr X. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X.

  • Worcestershire County Council (24 005 493)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr B has complained about a supported living placement funded by the Council and Integrated Care Board. We will not investigate this complaint as it would be unlikely that we would find fault with either organisation.

  • Stroud District Council (24 006 273)

    Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s decision to require a disabled facilities grant application to be made by a property owner, rather than a tenant. The Council was at fault, because resources issues triggered some delay in the process, but there were also other factors which caused delays which were not in the Council’s control. We are satisfied, however, the delay caused by the Council creates some uncertainty, and the Council has agreed to formally apologise for this.

  • Bristol City Council (24 002 967)

    Statement Upheld Direct payments 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the amount offered by the Council to reimburse missed direct payments it too low and does not cover the actual costs incurred. The normal respite arrangements were considered unsuitable to meet Mr X’s needs but no clear agreement on respite was ever reached. I have recommended an amount based on the normal Shared Lives respite payments.

  • Hampshire County Council (23 015 044)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs O complained about the care provided to her late husband Mr B in a nursing home. We found no evidence of fault by the nursing home in the actions it took when Mr B’s condition deteriorated and he went into hospital. We did not find fault in how the nursing home responded to the complaint. We found fault by the Council as it did not respond to Mrs O’s complaint. This fault caused Mrs O frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs O and make improvements in how it handles complaints.

  • South Africa Lodge (23 015 044a)

    Statement Not upheld Other 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs O complained about the care provided to her late husband Mr B in a nursing home. We found no evidence of fault by the nursing home in the actions it took when Mr B’s condition deteriorated and he went into hospital. We did not find fault in how the nursing home responded to the complaint. We found fault by the Council as it did not respond to Mrs O’s complaint. This fault caused Mrs O frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs O and make improvements in how it handles complaints.

  • Precious Support Services Limited (24 010 400)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care support at home. This is because the Care Provider has thoroughly investigated and responded to the complaint, and it is unlikely we could add to that investigation or reach a different outcome.

  • Stour Sudbury Limited (24 011 492)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care support during a respite stay in a residential care home. This is because the Care Provider has thoroughly investigated and responded to the complaint, and it is unlikely we could add to that investigation or reach a different outcome.

  • Wakefield City Council (24 012 195)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about her adult social care support. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

  • Chanctonbury Health Care Ltd (24 015 441)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 06-Jan-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Care Provider has failed to refund his mother’s care home fees following her death. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because Mr X has started court action about the matter.

  • Essex County Council (24 011 490)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 03-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a safeguarding matter in a care home. It is unlikely we could achieve anything significant enough to warrant investigating.

  • London Borough of Enfield (24 004 238)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 02-Jan-2025

    Summary: We upheld a complaint that Mr F received poor care while in a care home placement arranged by the Council. We also found the Council at fault for a flawed safeguarding investigation which followed. These faults caused injustice to Mr F who experienced a loss of a service and to his daughter who made the complaint, as distress. The Council has accepted these findings. At the end of this statement, we set out the action it has agreed to remedy this injustice and improve its service.

  • Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (24 002 763)

    Statement Upheld Charging 02-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly invoiced home care visits for his wife which meant they incurred costs for care his wife did not receive and she suffered distress from not receiving the care she needed. We have found fault but consider the Council’s proposed actions of an apology, cancellation of care fees and a symbolic payment for inconvenience and upset provides a suitable remedy.

  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 011 014)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 02-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care. The person using the service has died so we can provide no personal remedy for any poor care. The person complaining does not have a significant enough personal injustice to justify our involvement.

  • London Borough of Haringey (24 014 475)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 02-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue a companion travel pass. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.