A care operator is demanding a public inquiry into alleged ’mismanagement’ of taxpayers’ money over a Douglas care home.

The government-owned but privately-operated Salisbury Street care home opened in June last year - and was heralded as a way of tackling ’bed blocking’ at Noble’s Hospital.

But Dave Murray, director of Adorn Domiciliary Care which won the tender to operate the home, claims the Department of Health and Social Care over-estimated demand for beds and that government never needed to buy the facility for £7.9m in the first place.

He has called for a public inquiry into how the government procured Salisbury Street. ’I’m asking for a public inquiry. In my opinion it’s the mismanagement of taxpayers’ money. Taxpayers have a right to know how their money is spent.’

Tynwald approved the purchase of home for £7.9m in June 2016.

But Mr Murray, who was part of the private consortium Salisbury Care Ltd that built the facility, revealed that the development cost £5.3m to £5.6m to build.

He believes government paid over the odds for the home and claims he was ’coerced’ into selling his stake in the consortium.

As part of the contract awarded to Adorn, 40 of the 68 beds were to be made available to those who were solely reliant on state benefits to fund their nursing care costs.

The move was designed to tackle an issue of bed-blocking at Noble’s Hospital, where patients were unable to be discharged as they didn’t have a nursing home place they could afford.

Other nursing homes were charging more than the £812.10 per week, which was the maximum paid by the state in benefits. But Mr Murray claims in the event very few of people in this category came in, and that a number of the 40 beds are now occupied by those who partially fund their own care costs.

And yet the taxpayer still pays £812.10 a week per bed whether they are full or not.

’A senior civil servant said to me "we seem to have got our figures wrong", he said.

’My point is why is the taxpayer paying for those beds? The government didn’t need to spend £7.9m.’

But in a statement, the DHSC said: ’The Salisbury Street home was independently valued and a model put in place to ensure that anyone solely reliant on benefits would be able to access nursing care facilities.

’Since the beginning of the contract, three-quarters of the beds have been in constant use, as we modelled. We also receive rent from the care home operator.’

A 10% increase in the nursing care contribution was announced in the Budget. But there is evidence that already care homes have increased their fees in response.

The DHSC said: ’The government is already taking several steps to tackle the rising cost and shortage of nursing care places.

’We have announced a fundamental review into the sustainability of funding both nursing and residential care, and it is why Salisbury Street was purchased.

’Alongside the review, we have announced plans to build a new residential care home to replace Rearyt Ny Baie residential home on the site of the former Glenside home.’

Mr Murray claims there is evidence of government paying twice at Salisbury Street - funding benefits for partially funded residents but also paying the £812.10 rate for the bed. He also alleged some residents are not paying the balance between their benefit and the care home fee.

Mr Murray said the original intention had been for Salisbury Care to build the facility and have Adorn run it, without any involvement of the government.

But half way through its construction, he said he was called into a meeting with DHSC officers who told him the home would not be registered.

He felt he had no choice but to sell his stake in the consortium and the facility was subsequently sold to the government. He said ’given the pressure we were put under’ he believes the consortium was ’coerced’ into selling the home to government.

complaint

The DHSC confirmed an independent investigator is reviewing the complaint that Mr Murray was allegedly ’coerced’ by two civil servants into selling his stake in Salisbury Care.

It said after the purchase of Salisbury Street, it received offers from private investors/operators, including the current operator, to buy the facility at the price paid by government.

The DHSC explained that the block purchase of beds was necessary to attract an operator to provide 40 beds at benefit rates.

For the government to break even, 75% of the beds need to be filled over the course of the five-year contract. Since the beginning of September, there has not been a period when less than 75% of the commissioned beds were not occupied.

The DHSC said the Mr Murray was correct in saying that there are very few people who rely solely on benefits to fund their beds - and for this reason the threshold has been set at 95% of care costs to be met from benefits.

Regulations are being laid before Tynwald next week to enable the department to charge residents for the 5% contribution.