Archive has 817 results
-
London Borough of Croydon (17 002 640)
Statement Upheld Other 26-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsmen find a series of failings in the care of a vulnerable young woman over several years. Social care and health care organisations had clear responsibilities to provide her with suitable joined up care in a timely manner but this did not always happen. This meant there were lost opportunities for more appropriate care, sooner. It has left uncertainty about how the woman’s life would have been different now had the fault not occurred. The relevant organisations have agreed to make apologies, financial payments and actions to learn lessons from the case.
-
Middlesbrough Borough Council (19 014 419)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s social services team’s involvement in her family. There are no good reasons why the late complaint rule should not apply, the complaint involves bodies not within our jurisdiction and there are other bodies better placed to consider her concerns.
-
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (19 017 131)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to respond to his request for information. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider his complaint.
-
London Borough of Lambeth (19 001 012)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 25-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X's complaint about the support her adult child received. She does not have their consent to complaint. We should not investigate her complain about information sharing with her as the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed.
-
Kent County Council (19 001 694)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Friends and family carers 25-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to stop paying a Special Guardianship Allowance to the complainant. This is because the complainant has started legal action against the Council.
-
Gloucestershire County Council (19 004 566)
Statement Upheld Disabled children 25-Feb-2020
Summary: Miss X and Mrs Y complain about the Council’s handling and outcome on their complaints about children’s social care. They say the Council has not considered the financial loss, hardship and trauma suffered. The Ombudsman finds fault in the Council’s consideration of the complaint at Stage 3. The Ombudsman recommends the Council pays £500 for time and trouble and £1000 for the distress suffered by Miss X and Mrs Y.
-
West Berkshire Council (19 010 574)
Statement Not upheld Looked after children 24-Feb-2020
Summary: Mr X complains that the Council has failed to act on recommendations made by a court-appointed expert in relation to his daughter. Parts of the complaint are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. The Ombudsman will not investigate the rest of the complaint further as it could not achieve the outcome Mr X is looking for.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 24-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the complainant and his family no longer being allowed to have contact with his grandchild. This is because, it concerns a decision made in private law proceedings, and lies outside our jurisdiction.
-
Middlesbrough Borough Council (19 016 643)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 24-Feb-2020
Summary: On the evidence currently available, the Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about a Council report produced for the Police. The report was part of a criminal investigate and we cannot investigate this.
-
North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (19 016 664)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 24-Feb-2020
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about children services actions more than 20 years ago. There are no good reasons the late complaint rule should not apply.