A CARE firm is facing action from regulators after it failed to protect the elderly and infirm using its service from abuse.

Clece Care Services’ Gateshead branch was deemed to be inadequate in four out of five competency areas inspected. Seventy safeguarding concerns had also been raised.

A report by the Care Quality Commission found the service to people in their homes was not safe, effective, responsive or well-led and was not always caring.

Clece Care also operates in Barnard Castle, Teesdale, Crook, Tow Law and Weardale, and is one of a number of private providers Durham County Council has contracts with to provide domiciliary care.

The report said: “The high volume of safeguarding issues demonstrated that people had been neglected and placed at risk of harm due to not receiving their care service.

“Concerns about staff turnover and resources, ineffective roster management and lack of a proper system to monitor visits meant people continued to be at risk of neglect.

“We concluded that the provider had failed to protect people using the service from abuse.”

It also said there was not enough staff and insufficient capacity to consistently deliver people’s care and there was a significant number of times when visits were missed.

Complaints levelled against Clece Care include that an elderly person was left in a chair for several hours and unable to get to bed after a missed call, while another reportedly had four missed visits in a day, meaning they did not receive their medication.

While Clece Care operates a separate branch in County Durham, both are run by the same company Clece Care Services Limited and share the same responsible individual registered with the CQC, Mario Abajo Meguez.

The company's roots are in Spain, where it describes itself as the “largest provider of care, cleaning and airport services” and its UK head office is in London.

The Echo contacted Clece Care, which also has a contract with Gateshead Council, but did not receive a response.

Gateshead Council said it was “very concerned” about the poor level of service some residents had received from Clece Care and had agreed a comprehensive action plan in order that it could fulfil its contractual obligation.

A spokesman for the CQC said: "We are taking enforcement action, but because of legal; reasons we are unable to comment any further."