complaint·August 19, 2025

Resident R1 received from Fountaingrove Lodge licensee a refund check on 6/24/25, which was short by $258.71. Administrator offered to have accounting of Fountaingrove Lodge send another check for the owed amount of $258.71. R1 refused this offer and requested that Fountaingrove Lodge provide a new check with the full owed "entrance fee refund". R1 returned the check with the incorrect amount of their refund to the Administrator. The second check requested from Fountaingrove Lodge licensee was received by the resident R1 on 8/6/2025. Investigation revealed, the first refund check to return owed funds to R1, from former unit's occupancy on 6/1/25, was received outside of the required 14 days from this date, per contract. Per review of records, conducted interviews with staff and other related parties, information obtained, the allegation of " staff did not issue proper refund to resident" is substantiated. The following deficiency will be cited, HSC1788.4.(a)(e) Refunds A lump-sum payment after termination of a repayable contract, as defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (r) of Section 1771, shall not be considered to be a refund and may not be characterized or advertised as a refund. The full lump sum owed, including any interest accrued, shall be paid to the resident within 14 calendar days after resale of the unit, see LIC9099D. The preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. California Code of Regulations, (Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8), is being cited. Failure to correct deficiencies by due dates, may result in additional deficiency citations and/or civil penalties being assessed. Appeal Rights Given. Exit interview conducted with the Administrator Megan Leone.