/ Health

The CMA must widen its investigation into care homes

Care homes

We’ve been investigating care home websites and contracts. We weren’t happy with what we found. Many providers weren’t upfront about charges, and some could be breaching consumer protection laws with unfair terms.

Last month, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published its mid-year update of its year-long market study into the care homes market, and its findings were bleak.

But we weren’t surprised because during this time we’d been doing our own investigations into care homes. For months, people have been telling us their stories about the troubles they’ve faced while dealing with care homes, either for themselves or on behalf of a loved one.

Lacking information

While it certainly isn’t the case for everyone, many people told us that going into a care home or having to find care for a relative can be an emotional and stressful time. At these times, It’s unlikely you’d be thinking about ‘shopping around for the best deal’, but rather the most appropriate care setting.

And yet our investigations found that during a time when you need vital information to make these important decisions, such as the cost of rooms, how many staff will be available at any one point, or what the visiting rights are for family and friends, care home providers are making it needlessly difficult to find out these details.

And on analysing the small sample of care home contracts we were eventually able to get our hands on (even these were a struggle to find), we found a number of terms and conditions that could be potentially breaching consumer protection laws.

Unfair terms

The CMA has already opened up a consumer protection case to investigate whether care home providers really are breaching consumer law. But we’ve heard about the traumatic impact unfair contracts can have on people, often when they’re at their most vulnerable.

One relative of a care home resident told us:

’…the contract that we signed said that at whatever point in the month a resident dies, there will be no refund for the rest of that month. Even though we were prepared to fully clear his room that day, we never received a penny back. Upset from just losing Dad, I was not in a fit state to challenge​ this.’

Another said:

‘I paid for 1:1 care but within 24 hours I was asked to remove my husband as they could not cope with him. I had asked what would happen if they couldn’t cope and they just said, ‘Don’t worry about that’. I was not informed I may have to remove him. My GP and social services told me to report them to the Care Quality Commission as they did not give him a chance and they should not have asked me to remove him.’

Stamping out poor practice

We’re pressing the CMA to widen its investigation and take action against providers breaching consumer protection laws to stamp out poor practice and ensure people entering the care setting are properly protected.

We will continue to feed in your experiences to inform the regulator’s work, which concludes at the end of the year, so please share your story with us using our care home reporting tool.

Comments
Guest
Sharron Howard says:
17 July 2017

My 25 year old step-granddaughter who had a learning disability was placed in a respite home in 2016 which was supposed to be a temporary measure but which lasted 12 months. This home’s website advertised that all rooms were en-suite. In fact, no rooms were en-suite. It had been inspected whilst our granddaughter lived there, by the CQC and was found to be “in need of improvement”, and in breach of its licence by having 7 residents when licenced for 5. In fact in the whole 12 months nothing improved. There was no lock on our granddaughters bedroom door and she had her possessions stolen on more than 1 occassion and she had no privacy. There were only 2 bathrooms which were shared by both sexes. I of the bathrooms was out of action for several weeks. Our granddaughter was poorly fed, dirty and unkempt and we had to remove her back to our care as we had no faith in the home’s ability to care for her adequately after her major surgery. I complained to the CQC but they said they only make recommendations and it was up to the Local Authority to take action. As far as I am aware, the local authority took no action and the home remained in breach of its licence for several months after the inspection. Thus flouting any recommendations by the Inspectors.

Guest
Roger Partridge says:
17 July 2017

This story above doesn’t sound good. But I can only report good experiences when my mother lived in a home for the last 6 years of her life. Despite deteriorating quickly with dementia in her last 3 years (she died at 96) we thought the staff were excellent with her. No doubt there may have been times when not everything was 100% perfect but she became extremely challenging in her behaviour and on the whole we felt the staff did really well with her. And she wasn’t the most difficult! The staff had some very difficult old people to contend with.
The example given of payment of fees 2 weeks after a family member had died I thought was pedantic. Personally I would have accepted 2 weeks. I wouldn’t have accepted much longer and certainly no longer than a month. There must be a reasonable middle ground. I guess these periods must be defined in the original agreement but its often something that isn’t top of the list to clarify; I know we didn’t and we didn’t know what the final bill would be when Mum died. All I can remember is that it all seemed reasonable to us.

Guest
Norman Taylor says:
19 July 2017

When my mother decided it was time for her to go into a retirement home, she was 90 at the time, we looked around at a few places. I would point out that this was in Australia. We looked at a few private places but found that their costs were inflated to the extreme and also that the homes that were closed down by the government were the privately run retirement homes.
Our local council ran a ‘ not for profit’ home provided for the local residents. My mother decided to enrol in this home. It is called Amaroo Gardens. It was taken over by another not for profit business and the care given literally doubled overnight. Excellent conditions and care.
The initial cost for this was A$ 175,000 which was put into trust for the upkeep of the home, i.e.: gardens, building maintenance. $7500 was taken on a yearly basis from the money in the trust fund. The costs for my mother on a weekly basis was taken from her pension. Her pension also included a living away from home allowance, so her pension on a fortnightly basis was a bit over A$840. Only a monthly basis, after all daily/ weekly costs were deducted, my mother still had approximately A$200 a month left in her pension account.
The care given at Amaroo was excellent and nothing was a problem. Their activities were all voluntary on a daily basis and this give the retirement home a brilliant ‘vibe’ that you could feel when you walked into the home. My mother was in the dementia ward even though she was not that badly affected, unlike some of them. The dementia section had 14 rooms for this type of resident. The main building had 80 rooms for the normal resident, and it also had 4 outside units for married couples. It was a large complex.
When my mother passed away after 4 years in Amaroo Gardens I received a rebate from the initial trust fund of A$ 155,000. Needless to say, there is a large waiting list for enrolment into this retirement home. The company that owns and runs the home has four other businesses built on the same methods and procedures. They are audited twice a year and get very good results from these audits. Many private homes do not get the results that Amaroo Gardens does.
It’s unfortunate that there is no similar setup here in the U.K. Amaroo Gardens is subsidised by the government to offset some operating costs. The private homes receive no government funding or subsidies because of the inflated costs of the business.
Perhaps this has been a bit long winded but it will give you an idea of how a respectable and recommended retirement home should be run.

Regards
G Norman Taylor.
Lasswade, Mid Lothian.

Guest
nora thompson says:
24 July 2017

My sister was in a care home from October 2015 to April 2016 when she died suddenly and unexpectedly. We were not told her condition had deteriorated until I received a call saying she had died. Her care was unacceptable – she was a big lady with severe mobility issues. She did not have toilet facilities in her room and often didn’t manage to get to the toilet without having an accident. Staff were told to monitor her hourly but this was never done and she ended up with unexplained bruising to her head. She deteriorated rapidly in the home and if we had had a choice she would never have been placed there. Quality of staff left a lot to be desired but I understand that wages are low so maybe won’t attract the best available which should definitely be addressed. Other staff were exemplary but only worked on alternate days so care was hit and miss

Profile photo of johncfberg
Guest

There is an Inquest on 3/01/17 at Bournemouth town hall into the cause of death of Miss Mary H. Lycett, who was at Brook View residential and nursing home, Riverside Road, West Moors, Dorset, BH22 0LQ, (under Colten Care Company), where she was allowed to come off a hydro bath seat onto a hard floor and fractured her pelvic bone on 21/01/17. She died six weeks later in Wimborne Victoria Hospital on 4/03/17. She had been sent from Brook View to Poole Hospital on 27/01/17, where she was treated and later on in February sent from there to Wimborne Victoria Hospital, where she died. She would have been 81 years old on 15/03/17, eleven days after she died.