Service User agreement with Care Agency

[Szaitisja]

Hello
I wonder if any of you have come across a paragraph like this in an agreement with care agencies.

'While the Agency will fully vet and supply care workers who it considers to be suitable for the Service User the Agency cannot guarantee the suitability of a care worker and cannot guarantee the attendance or performance for the booking. The Agency accept no liability for any loss, expenses or damage arising from any failure to provide any Care worker for the whole or any part of the period of any booking'

I queried it with a SW yesterday and she seemed very surprised.
Would appreciate any thoughts
thank you

 

[love.dad.but..]

I used two agencies for live in care and can't remember a clause worded in that way. However the 2nd carer was most unsuited to live in care.
If that is not the industry standard usual clause inclusion I would not be happy with it. It absolves them from any liability or responsibility of everything in every area! Almost that they are covering themselves as they anticipate there will be problems!

 

[Cat27]

That sounds a bit iffy.

You could give our helpline a ring & they may be able to help you with this.

National Dementia Helpline
0300 222 11 22
Our helpline advisers are here for you.
Helpline opening hours:
Monday to Wednesday 9am – 8pm
Thursday and Friday 9am – 5pm
Saturday and Sunday 10am – 4pm
Please note that the Helpline will be closed on Monday 27 August for the Bank Holiday.

We will be open on Saturday 25 and Sunday 26 August as usual. We will reopen at 9am on Tuesday 28 August.

 

[Szaitisja]

I agree it looks iffy.
At first i thought, maybe i am misunderstanding it (English is not my first language but i do not normally have problems).
SW did say she will discuss it with her superiors.
Thank you for the phone number, I might give them a ring. I was wondering if this is common practice amongst agencies to accept no responsibility for what they provide (as that is in essence how I see it)

 

[Kevinl]

I think you'll find clauses like this in many contracts, whether they're legal or not is a different matter. There are various "Unfair terms and conditions" laws there's a link below to one.
If it ever got to court it probably wouldn't be allowed as you say they're basically saying nothing is their responsibility even down to whether they actually turn up or not.
K

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ploads/attachment_data/file/284426/oft311.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/unfair-terms-explained-for-businesses-full-guide#what-is-unfair

 

[MaNaAk]

Hello
I wonder if any of you have come across a paragraph like this in an agreement with care agencies.

'While the Agency will fully vet and supply care workers who it considers to be suitable for the Service User the Agency cannot guarantee the suitability of a care worker and cannot guarantee the attendance or performance for the booking. The Agency accept no liability for any loss, expenses or damage arising from any failure to provide any Care worker for the whole or any part of the period of any booking'

I queried it with a SW yesterday and she seemed very surprised.
Would appreciate any thoughts
thank you

I've never come across this either and I used two agencies. If you ever use this agency keep a recod of this and also keep a record of anything they do wrong. That way if things do go wrong you might have some sort of case.

MaNaAk

 

[Szaitisja]

I've never come across this either and I used two agencies. If you ever use this agency keep a recod of this and also keep a record of anything they do wrong. That way if things do go wrong you might have some sort of case.

MaNaAk

Thank you for your advise I do keep a record. We do use this agency mainly because it took over from a charity run one who stopped providing the home visits and all the carers transferred (TUPE). We wanted some continuity and familiar faces for PWD. It was not an easy transfer and there were a lot of hiccups but luckily our SW has been brilliant and it's all been sorted for now. Sadly most of the carers that transferred initially have found other jobs and we have only 2 of the 'old crew' left but some of the new ones are nice and R. likes them.

 

[MaNaAk]

Thank you for your advise I do keep a record. We do use this agency mainly because it took over from a charity run one who stopped providing the home visits and all the carers transferred (TUPE). We wanted some continuity and familiar faces for PWD. It was not an easy transfer and there were a lot of hiccups but luckily our SW has been brilliant and it's all been sorted for now. Sadly most of the carers that transferred initially have found other jobs and we have only 2 of the 'old crew' left but some of the new ones are nice and R. likes them.

Dear Szaitisja,

I hope things keep running as smoothly as possible for you for as long as possible.

MaNaAk

 

[Szaitisja]

Thank you. I hope so too. I must admit it was a big eye opener when the agency changed. There is a huge difference in how things are run (unfortunately not for the better usually) but it still seems to be one of the best in the area.

 

[Szaitisja]

I think you'll find clauses like this in many contracts, whether they're legal or not is a different matter. There are various "Unfair terms and conditions" laws there's a link below to one.
If it ever got to court it probably wouldn't be allowed as you say they're basically saying nothing is their responsibility even down to whether they actually turn up or not.
K

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ploads/attachment_data/file/284426/oft311.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/unfair-terms-explained-for-businesses-full-guide#what-is-unfair

thank you for those links. it certainly puts my mind at ease a bit.

 

[Selinacroft]

If this is funded by SS, make sure they are aware of the clause and mention safguarding. If you are privately funding- change agency! The whole point of using an agency instead of paying an individual is that they ensure cover , provide back up for sickness amongst colleagues etc. This seems totally unacceptable. Does the company have relevant insurance certificates to operate? Maybe worth running this by CQC and asking their opinion? Not everyone would read the small print which is what they are probably counting on.

 

[Szaitisja]

If this is funded by SS, make sure they are aware of the clause and mention safguarding. If you are privately funding- change agency!

SS is already aware as i brought it to their attention. SW also found couple of other paragraphs that might be of concern so I am waiting for an update as I only spoke to them on Thursday and provided the copy of this.

 

[Selinacroft]

Good, I hopt they take issue with it and use alternative company- shameful practice. Just go to show we should all read the small print.

 

[Szaitisja]

Good, I hopt they take issue with it and use alternative company- shameful practice. Just go to show we should all read the small print.

To be fair this is one of the reasons that made me so concerned. One of my friends used to work for CAB for many years and is able to give advise similar to @Kevinl earlier on this thread, which can put minds at ease a little bit. I do wonder however, if it's a common practice amongst agencies if it might put off relatives and overwhelmed carers off taking action if they have concerns about the service to speak to someone as reading a thing like this at first could make them think there is no point if they signed it and agreed to it.
I hope SS will take some action on this.