Skip to main content

Inspection visit

Complaint

VILLA ALAMARLicense 425850001
Clean visit · 0 citations

Inspector’s narrative

What the inspector wrote

This is an amended report. On 02/28/2024, LPA requested documents pertaining to the investigation, conducted observations of the pertinent areas of the facility, and interviewed both Residents and Staff members of the facility. LPA conducted an interview of Staff Member #1 (S1), who stated there was no eviction notice, or threat of eviction. S1 stated that R1 and their Responsible Party are consistently late with their rent, but the facility is just asking them to pay the amount on their monthly bill. LPA conducted record review of documentation pertinent to the allegation in the complaint. LPA received the following documentation: Facility Invoice Statements for Resident #1 (R1) with Payment Terms on 01/01/2024, 01/16/2024, 02/01/2024, 03/01/2024 that included current monetary balances and specified amounts for monthly rent and monthly received services by R1. LPA also received copies of email correspondence between the facility and the Reporting Party (RP) dated 12/28/2023 which informed RP that R1 was over two (2) months behind on rent and reminded RP to pay the rent on time in full. The 12/28/2023 email has no mention by the facility of eviction procedures for R1. Additionally, LPA received a hard copy of email correspondence between the facility and RP dated 02/14/2024 serving as a reminder to pay the outstanding rent to the facility. The 02/14/2024 email correspondence between the facility and RP had an attachment sent by the facility to RP consisting of a formal letter from the administrator of the facility. This formal letter was attached to the 02/14/2024 email from the facility to RP and was also sent by the facility to RP through Postal Mail, which has RP’s mailing address listed on the letter. The formal letter from the facility to RP indicated that R1 had an outstanding monetary balance at the facility of a total of $5,645.20 that was owed. The letter stated that the facility is conceding RP a one (1) month grace period to bring the account of R1 into good standing by making the full payment by 03/15/2024. The letter stated that if payment is not received by 03/15/2024, then the facility will begin to initiate eviction procedures according to regulatory guidance, but the letter did not state anything about current eviction procedures. On 03/05/2024, LPA asked RP if the mailing address the facility sent all documentation to about R1’s financial situation is a correct postal mailing address for RP. RP responded that at the time the documents were sent, it was a correct postal mailing address, but it was not checked that often at all. Continued on 9099-C This is an amended report. The letter did not indicate an eviction procedure had been initiated against R1, only that the facility will begin to initiate an eviction procedure on 03/15/2024 if RP continues with nonpayment of R1’s monthly bill and fails to make the full payment by that date. Based on the information obtained, there was insufficient evidence to prove the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. On the allegation: Facility staff did not provide proper notice for rate increase(s). It is alleged that the facility has new ownership, who recently increased the rates significantly without 60 days’ notice. The allegation states the rate increase is not due to a change in the level of care of the resident. On 02/28/2024, LPA requested documents pertaining to the investigation, conducted observations of the pertinent areas of the facility, and interviewed both Residents and Staff members of the facility. LPA conducted an interview with Staff Member #1 (S1), who stated that the facility sent all residents the payment invoice/bill for March 2024 on 02/21/2024. Due to an email error, two (2) residents received the wrong bill, meaning that the residents received the bill for each other. S1 stated this mistake/error in billing was due to the two (2) residents having almost identical surnames, and the invoices were initially sent to the incorrect residents. According to S1, the relatives of R1 immediately noticed the rate on the bill and thought that it was an increase in rates rather than an incorrect bill. S1 stated that they spoke with the relatives of R1 and provided a correct bill. On 02/28/2024, LPA interviewed R1’s Responsible Party (RP). RP admitted to LPA that there was an initial misunderstanding regarding a received invoice from the facility, as the facility had mistakenly sent RP an invoice for a separate resident that had an almost identical surname to R1. RP also had concerns about the facility invoices and believes that the facility has the wrong outstanding balance for R1. RP stated that the facility recently increased the rates significantly without 60 days’ notice. Continued on 9099-C This is an amended report. LPA conducted record review of documentation pertinent to the allegation in the complaint. LPA received the following documentation: Resident Rental Agreement Addendum for R1 that was signed/dated by the administrator of the facility on 10/20/2023. This Resident Rental Agreement Addendum was sent via postal mail to the address of RP and sent via email to the email address of RP that the facility had on file. The 10/20/2023 Rental Agreement Addendum stated that the facility would be increasing the rent for R1 beginning 01/01/2024 by eight (8) percent, which equaled a $125.40 increase in the monthly rate for R1. Therefore, the monthly rate for R1 went from $1,567.50 to $1,692.90. The facility maintained in the Rental Agreement Addendum that the increase in rent was necessary to maintain the caregivers/staff members of the facility due to wage demands and increased costs associated with operating the facility. The facility gave over 60 days’ written notice at the increase of rates, and was in compliance with regulation to increase resident rates. Based on the information obtained, there was insufficient evidence to prove the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is deemed Unsubstantiated at this time. Exit interview conducted, a copy of this report was provided to the facility. This is an amended report. This page is left intentionally blank.

Citations

No citations recorded on this visit

The inspector found no violations of California child care regulations during this visit.

FAQ · About this visit

Common questions about this visit

What happened during the April 5, 2024 inspection of VILLA ALAMAR?

This was a complaint inspection of VILLA ALAMAR on April 5, 2024. The inspection found no deficiencies and no citations were issued.

Were any citations issued to VILLA ALAMAR on April 5, 2024?

No citations were issued during this inspection. The facility was found to be in compliance with all applicable regulations.

What type of inspection was this?

This was a complaint inspection. Complaint inspections are triggered when someone reports a concern about the facility to CCLD.

Share this reportEmail

Next steps

If this is your facility,claim this pageand correct anything the record gets wrong. Free.

Researching this visit professionally?Book a 15-minute calland we will walk through what we have on file.

Data from CCLD public records. Last updated . If you believe any information is inaccurate, report it here.