‘Til death us do part


Posted on August 22nd, by geoff in CT blog. 1 Comment

By guest blogger BOB FERGUSON

A few days ago I stumbled across a radio programme featuring an item about a care home contract that provided for payment in lieu of “notice” on the death of a resident. The aunt of the “complainant” had been a long-term resident in the home. When she died five years ago, he declined to pay. He has since been pursued intermittently by the home which is now threatening court action. There was no mention in the programme of the resident’s property having been left in her room following her death.

The presenter spoke to one of the care home industry’s more cerebral spokespersons to give his reactions. I must say I expected to hear the voice of reason: a short sharp repudiation of this repugnant practice, followed perhaps by a pledge to root it out from among his own membership as an example to the remainder of the sector.

Instead we heard about liability extending beyond the grave and that it was a contractual relationship. Although he didn’t use the term “buyer beware”, it was implicit in much of what he said. All true, of course, but in the circumstances embarrassingly incongruous. This was no time for weasel words.

No need to leaf through the OFT guidance or reach out to our learned friends for advice, this practice – 30-day notice terms on death are now said to be the “norm” – is self-evidently unacceptable. It reeks of exploitation. In economic terms, deaths are unavoidable hazards for care homes, but they are part and parcel of the business. Where there is no furniture or effects to be cleared, owners should bite the bullet and accept them as such.

I have no idea how popular this programme is, but I’d guess the majority of its listeners would have been left with the sourest of sour tastes in their mouths. For those contemplating a care home placement, either for themselves or their nearest and dearest, it would have been much worse. Another unknown. Another worry.

The care home sector can do without such self-inflicted injuries.

  • The CT Blog is written in a personal capacity – comments and opinions expressed are not necessarily endorsed or supported by Caring Times.




One response to “‘Til death us do part”

  1. John Burton says:

    I agree. Once residents, relatives and staff believe that the people owning and running the home are doing so for profit first and good care somewhere down their list of priorities, there’s a breakdown of trust. Putting good care first is nigh on impossible for most of the big providers because they are in business only for profit. The better ones realise that they will make more money long term if they appear to prioritise good care and don’t pull tricks like this. However, many smaller providers genuinely do prioritise good care and are trusted because they didn’t set up their homes to rip off residents and their families. Increasingly, these homes are being closed because they can’t survive financially and are undermined by inappropriate regulation and inspection.


Latest blog posts

It’s a hard, hard world

By Caring Times editor GEOFF HODGSON

A recent survey has found that 63% of the general public believe the NHS provides social care and 42% think...

Sign-up and pay, or perhaps pay more

By Caring Times editor GEOFF HODGSON

There are powerful arguments why carers working at night in small specialist care facilities should be paid their full hourly...

The parallel universes of social care

By guest blogger JOHN BURTON

The Care Quality Commission’s adult social care ‘productivity’ dipped in August and for the umpteenth time the 90% target of...