Bristol City Council (18 011 958)

Statement Upheld Other 05-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr B complains that he did not receive proper support from the Council through the Bristol (Syrian Refugee) Resettlement Scheme. The Council was at fault because it initially placed him in a property which was too small, did not explain deductions from a deposit, did not deal with a grant application, did not properly consider a request for a s17 child in need assessment and did not deal with his complaint properly. Mr B’s daughter missed out on a grant payment and it is unclear whether Mr B’s son requires help. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B, pay Mr B’s daughter £304.80 and complete a s17 assessment regarding Mr B’s son.

London Borough of Hounslow (19 013 686)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 05-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered the complaint’s application for a Disabled Person’s Parking Badge. This is because he is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Warwickshire County Council (19 016 134)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Direct payments 05-Mar-2020

Summary: Ms X complained that the Council ended her Direct Payments. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Leicestershire County Council (19 017 112)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 05-Mar-2020

Summary: Mrs X complains about care homes employing staff who have been subject to care proceedings involving their children. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or personal injustice to Mrs X.

London Borough of Harrow (19 018 690)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 05-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about an application for a Blue Badge. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council so an investigation is not warranted.

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (19 003 492)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 04-Mar-2020

Summary: Ms X complained that Walsall Metropolitan Council, Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust and Pleck Health Centre failed to meet safeguarding duties in respect of her late mother, Mrs Y. The agencies responded appropriately to safeguarding alerts and made best interest decisions about Mrs Y’s care that considered relevant evidence, including the difference of views amongst family members. The Council was at fault for not feeding back the outcome of its safeguarding investigation to the Pleck Health Centre. This did not cause injustice.

London Borough of Waltham Forest (19 004 081)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 04-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council decided where his mother should go on discharge from hospital and the way it dealt with his complaint. The Ombudsman finds no fault by the Council.

Bristol City Council (19 005 844)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 04-Mar-2020

Summary: There was fault by the Council. It did not review Mrs B’s care plan or advise her, or her family that she was not entitled to housing benefit (HB) to pay the rent of her flat while she was in residential care. The Council’s shortcomings mean Mrs B incurred a debt she may have otherwise avoided. The Council has made improvements to how it handles these situations. It agreed to refund the amount of overpaid HB to Mrs B’s estate.

Devon County Council (19 006 893)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 04-Mar-2020

Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council came to a decision to reduce Ms Y’s support hours. The Council properly assessed Ms Y before making the decision. As there is no evidence of fault in the process, I cannot comment on the merits of the decision reached.

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (17 016 346)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 04-Mar-2020

Summary: Ms G has autism, severe anxiety disorder and associated mental health disorders. She complained that Bradford Metropolitan District Council failed to provide her with support for over five years despite agreeing a support plan with her and her consultant psychiatrist from 2014. Ms G claims this impacted on her wellbeing severely. The Ombudsman found the Council failed to provide Ms G with support for at least five years. This severely impacted on Ms G’s wellbeing. The Council agreed to the Ombudsman’s recommendations and will apologise to Ms G, pay her a financial remedy, provide her with support and improve its services for people with autism and communication difficulties.