An Ibstock care home asked the family of one its residents for £102 to cover the cost of petrol and getting an extra staff member in when they took the woman to hospital after a fall.

The lady, who has dementia, had broken her wrist. Staff working at The Elms Care Centre in Melbourne Road did not take her for an x-ray until the day after the incident despite swelling so severe she had to have her rings cut off.

The home then billed her family in an attempt to recoup £102 – to cover "miles driven, petrol and the costs of having another carer cover a shift".

The home's request was revealed when the woman's daughter made complaints to the Local Government Ombudsman.

A number of her complaints were upheld, resulting in the Ombudsman telling Leicestershire County Council – the authority that set up the placement – to improve its processes.

The anonymised report details complaints made by the woman about the way her mum – who is referred to as Mrs C in the report – was treated during her time at the home.

It also reveals that Mrs C's daughter refused to pay fees to the home as a result of her concerns.

The Ombudsman ruled she must settle all but 10 per cent of the outstanding bill but told the council it must pay Mrs C and her daughter £500 for the distress caused.

The woman said she suspects her mum was hit while living at the home saying that her mum repeatedly said "don't hurt me" after she moved out of the home.

She told an investigator that her mum "flinched" when she tried to brush her hair and "feared being hit".

The council considered the matter as part of a safeguarding investigation it opened in response to a complaint and said that "due to the time elapsed the investigation could not substantiate that Mrs C suffered any physical abuse".

The Ombudsman said: "I understand why [daughter] has concerns in this area but it is speculative to link Mrs C's flinching and comments with any specific incident in the care home."

The woman, who has power of attorney over her mum's finances, also said that the home failed to properly manage her mum's diet and said that she became incontinent while living there – in part due to the provider "failing to ensure she followed a coeliac diet".

She made repeated complaints to the county council about the "quality of the care" her mum was receiving.

She and her sister were unhappy that her mum was not given the opportunity to to play the piano or take part in activities that they said were promised when she moved in. They said that as a result, their mum lost mobility while living at the home.

Mrs C's daughters were also upset that staff did not ensure their mum wore clean clothes and did not support her with her personal appearance including hair and nail care.

Concerns were also raised about dry skin patches on Mrs C's legs that "bled when touched".

All of the complaints are relating to incidents during the time Mrs C lived there – between July 2017 and March 2018.

The home said that the incidents took place during a "transitional period" and that changes made since then mean there is "negligible if not nil risk of recurrence" of any of the incidents included in the complaint.

The Ombudsman investigated the complaints made by Mrs C's daughter about The Elms and subsequent complaints about the way the county council investigated the concerns.

On the way Mrs C was treated after the fall, the investigator said: "The care provider failed to seek suitable prompt medical treatment for Mrs C.

"It had clear evidence of Mrs C being in pain with signs of injury. It knew, as a minimum, that Mrs C needed an x-ray. I can see no reason it should not have tried to obtain that x-ray the same day, consistent with its duty to provide safe care to Mrs C. There was nothing to stop it acting more urgently and taking Mrs C to an A&E department."

The investigator also said that the home's risk assessment and record keeping processes indicated a "catalogue of poor care planning".

In response to Mrs C's daughter blaming the home for her mum being incontinent by the time she moved out, the investigator said that more could have been done to facilitate Mrs C's dietary requirements but added that they did not believe that "poor care caused Mrs C to become incontinent".

The Ombudsman also looked into the council's handling of its safeguarding investigation and the complaints made by Mrs C's daughter.

The investigator concluded: "I have concerns about the adequacy of the council's safeguarding investigation.

"I am concerned that in the areas of falls risk management, dietary assessment and skin integrity the council did not pick up on the deficiencies in the care provider's records.

"In this case I consider the council should have been more conscious of the need to consider others at the home whose needs may have been similarly poorly assessed."

The council was ordered to apologise and pay £500 to Mrs C's daughter for the distress caused. It was also told to write off 10 per cent of the remaining care home bill – the amount of which was not revealed.

In addition, the Ombudsman made a series of recommendations to the council and said that the authority should "learn lessons from this complaint".

A spokesperson for The Elms Care Centre said: "While we do not admit to any civil or contractual liability, and therefore make no admissions in that regard, we nevertheless, express deep regret for any sub-optimal practice that has been identified by the LGO.

"Since the time-frame set out in the LGO report, we made a number of improvements, by making staff changes, providing training in record-keeping and prompt responses to new care needs.

"Audits undertaken since the changes have been implemented demonstrate that the documentation and decision-making is now much improved such that there is negligible if not nil risk of recurrence of the matters set out in the concerns.

"We took over the management of the home in late 2016. Thereafter there was a transition period whereby the previous owner, and also the then manager, remained in place until 2018 while new systems were put in place. It was on their watch that the concerns occurred and they were not escalated to the new owner, despite reporting procedures. The individuals concerned no longer have involvement at the home."

A Leicestershire County Council spokesperson said: "We take complaints made to the council or Ombudsman very seriously. Equally, our role as a safeguarding authority is a top priority and we always investigate when concerns are raised.

"We have apologised to the complainant and have made a financial settlement to them.

"We have also taken steps to ensure similar incidents do not arise based on what we have learned from this complaint. The Ombudsman is satisfied with our actions and has now closed their investigation into this case."