As Hong Kong’s population continues to age, the proportion of senior citizens aged 65 or above is projected to rise from 23% in 2023 to 36% by 2046. In response, the Government has introduced various policies to strengthen elderly care and promote the development of the silver economy. Simultaneously, the business sector is tapping into this growing market by offering a broader range of products and services catering to the elderly. The Consumer Council has, however, received numerous complaints regarding these offerings in recent years, with cases including the lack of after-sales warranty for a mobile connected with emergency alarm system (EAS, commonly known as “ping on bell”) service, which undermines their intended purpose of assisting seniors in venturing out; a care home failing to administer feeding and medication on schedule, forcing the family to take the elder home for caregiving; and unrefunded deposits even in the unfortunate event of an elder passing away before being admitted into a care home.
The Council urges the industry to enhance service quality, and adopt a people-oriented business approach to respond to the needs of elders and their families with greater empathy and flexibility, particularly in unexpected circumstances. This not only improves the quality of life for elders, but is also conducive in helping the industry build a positive reputation to unlock more business opportunities. In addition, consumers could help seniors make well-informed decisions by carefully reviewing the pricing plans, contract terms, and after-sales arrangements of relevant products and services. With these concerted efforts, an age-friendly consumption environment can be fostered.
Case 1: Lack of After-Sales Warranty and Complex Termination Procedure for Safety Phone Service
The complainant subscribed to Company A’s 24-month safety mobile plan with EAS service at a monthly fee of $198 for his elderly father’s use. 6 months later, he observed that the phone’s battery was depleting rapidly and charging slowly. Upon requesting a battery replacement, he was informed by Company A that the phone model was outdated and replacement parts were no longer available. Furthermore, the service contract had not specified the after-sales warranty arrangements. The complainant questioned why replacement parts were unavailable for a phone sold just 6 months prior and asked to switch to another portable EAS device, but the request was denied by Company A citing that the existing plan was still in force. As a result, the complainant resorted to installing a tracking app on his father’s personal smartphone, leaving the safety mobile idle. After the plan expired, the complainant applied to terminate the service but was informed that a 30-day notice and completing a specific form was required. Finding these procedures overly complex for elderly users, the complainant approached the Council for assistance.
In response, Company A cited the service contract terms as a justification for the 30-day notice requirement. Nevertheless, following the Council’s conciliation, it agreed to waive the notice requirement and terminated the complainant’s plan at the contract end date, thereby resolving the case.
Case 2: Elderly Care Home Failed to Administer Meals and Medication on Schedule
Refund Denied for Early Termination of Residency
The complainant arranged for her mother, who has dementia, to stay at Care Home B for a month from 20 August to 19 September while she was on an overseas business trip. She paid $27,000 in total, which included the residency fees and a deposit. Shortly after departing Hong Kong, she learned that the care home was not adhering to her mother’s feeding and medication schedule. Although she arranged for relatives to travel from Australia to Hong Kong to assist, the care home’s visiting hours did not align with the medication schedule either. Consequently, the relatives had to take her mother home about 2 weeks earlier than the scheduled end of the stay. The complainant requested to terminate her mother’s residency via a messaging app. Care Home B acknowledged the request and sent her a photo of a “residency termination notice”, listing her mother’s name, the notification date, and the calculated residency and miscellaneous fees up to 6 September. It also agreed that the complainant could sign the notice upon her return. However, when she finally returned to Hong Kong to complete the termination procedure, Care Home B refused to refund the fees for the remaining 2 weeks. The complainant thus filed a complaint with the Council.
In its response to the Council, Care Home B stated that a 30-day notice period was contractually required for termination of residency, adding that it had never accepted the complainant’s early termination request. After the Council’s conciliation, it eventually agreed to charge the miscellaneous fees only up until 6 September, but maintained that the residency fees for the full period were non-refundable. Although dissatisfied with Care Home B’s response, the complainant reluctantly accepted the refund arrangement to avoid a prolonged dispute.
In 2024, the Consumer Council distributed questionnaires to private Residential Care Homes for the Elderly (RCHEs) that had not joined the Enhanced Bought Place Scheme of the Social Welfare Department (SWD). The survey findings revealed that these RCHEs had a disparate carer-to-resident ratio. The Council calls on the industry to improve the ratio in accordance with the Residential Care Homes Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) Ordinance 2023 and to enhance staff training to ensure residents receive consistent and adequate care services.
Case 3: Elder Passed Away Before Admitting into Care Home but Deposit Non-refundable
The complainant paid a $2,000 deposit to Care Home C to reserve a place for her hospitalised husband, intending for him to move in immediately upon discharge. Regrettably, her husband passed away 2 months later and never took up the reserved place. Considering this an unforeseen circumstance rather than a voluntary withdrawal, the complainant hoped to receive a refund of the deposit. However, Care Home C denied her request, citing a clause on the receipt stating, “The deposit is non-refundable in case of no admission”. Consequently, the complainant sought assistance from the Council.
The Council recommended that Care Home C exercise discretion in this case. In response, Care Home C reiterated that the complainant had been clearly informed at the time of payment that the deposit was non-refundable. It also pointed out that a place had been reserved for the complainant’s husband for 2 months, well beyond the usual practice of 14 days, which constituted a potential loss. Therefore, it stood firm in declining the refund request. The Council advised the complainant to seek legal counsel’s advice before deciding on further actions for redress.
When selecting products and services for elders, consumers are advised to pay heed to the following:
- A variety of portable EAS plans are currently available on the market. Consumers should compare different options and thoroughly review contract terms and after-sales service conditions before committing. As some contracts may be lengthy or printed in small font, elders may seek assistance from family members or trusted persons to understand the terms and to accompany them when signing a contract;
- Consumers may consult the “SWD Elderly Information Website”
(www.elderlyinfo.swd.gov.hk/en) for information on care homes. Consumers are recommended to personally visit the shortlisted care homes together with the elders to inspect the environment and facilities, as well as to gain a clear understanding of the pricing plan and terms. After the elder has moved in, frequent visits by family and friends can help monitor the quality of care service. In case of any dissatisfaction, seek help from the SWD. Retain all receipts as evidence for use at the time of terminating residency. In the unfortunate event of consumption disputes with the care home and direct negotiations fall through, consumers could reach out to the Consumer Council for conciliation; - Some traders may use giveaways and seminars to engage elders with the intention of selling overpriced supplements or products that claim health benefits. If these trade practices or products are causing doubt, elders could consult with family members or trusted persons to assess their needs first before purchase, so as to avoid falling into sales pitfalls.
Download the article (Chinese only): https://ccchoice.org/582-elderly
Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.