Decision search
Your search has 56874 results
-
South Gloucestershire Council (25 006 248)
Report Upheld Homelessness 27-Apr-2026
Summary: Ms X complained the Council refused to support her and her child when they fled domestic abuse in 2023. Specifically, she says the Council decided they did not qualify for homelessness assistance because they did not have a local connection to the area. Instead, the Council referred them back to their previous area, where the domestic abuse had occurred, on the basis that they had a local connection there. Ms X says these decisions have severely affected her mental health and wellbeing and placed her and her child at risk of further harm.
-
London Borough of Hounslow (25 003 635)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 15-Apr-2026
Summary
Mr X complained about misleading information received from the Council which had led to the change of his daughter’s (Y) school. He also complained about insufficient support in Y’s new school.
-
Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (24 017 327)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 14-Apr-2026
Summary: The Council was at fault. It failed to put alternative provision in place for Ms X’s child, Y between January and March 2024 and failed to ensure Y received an education and their specialist provision in line with their Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan between March 2024 and February 2025. The Council has already provided a partial remedy for its failings which caused Y to miss education between March 2024 and February 2025. The Council agreed to apologise and make a further payment to also remedy Y’s loss of education between January and March 2024. The Council also agreed to take action to improve its service.
-
London Borough of Bexley (24 018 763)
Statement Upheld Fostering 14-Apr-2026
Summary: Miss X complained the Council falsely accused her of poor care of her foster children and did not properly investigate her complaint. She says this distressed her and stopped her fostering more children. The Council was at fault. It failed to keep Miss X informed during the care investigation process and tell her the outcome. It also delayed its complaint response. This caused uncertainty and frustration for Miss X. The Council has agreed to apologise.
-
North Yorkshire Council (24 020 471)
Statement Upheld Private housing 14-Apr-2026
Summary: We have not found the Council at fault for how it responded to Ms X’s complaint about the accessibility of Company 1’s complaints procedure. We have found the Council at fault for not taking its own view on a resolution to Ms X’s complaint about the distress and frustration caused by poor coordination of works in Ms X’s home, including deciding whether Ms X was entitled to compensation. The Council has agreed to act to address the uncertainty caused by considering the matter again and providing a written decision to Ms X.
-
Cheshire East Council (25 000 499)
Statement Upheld Child protection 14-Apr-2026
Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of allegations made against her and the conduct of its safeguarding procedures. We have not found the Council at fault for its conduct or communication during its initial visit to Ms X’s home, or in how it accounted for the information received in its decision-making. We have found the Council at fault for not appropriately providing Ms X with a copy of its assessment and for delay in issuing its closure letter. We believe this caused Ms X avoidable distress and uncertainty. We found the Council at fault for not making clear Ms X could have been accompanied during an interview. For the reasons set out in the decision, we do not believe this caused a significant injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and pay a symbolic financial remedy to recognise the avoidable distress caused. The Council also agreed to remind staff that individuals can be accompanied in interviews where appropriate.
-
Westminster City Council (25 000 514)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 14-Apr-2026
Summary: Mrs X complained how the Council handled her daughter’s personal budget. She also says the Council delayed finalising her daughter’s Education, Health and Care Plan, it failed to respond to her request for a sensory assessment and its complaints handling was flawed. We find the Council was at fault for how it handled Mrs X’s daughter’s personal budget and for its delay in finalising the Education, Health and Care Plan. It was also at fault for its complaints handling and its communication. These faults caused Mrs X’s upset and frustration. Mrs X’s daughter missed out on special educational provision. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X and her daughter, make payments and implement a service improvement.
-
Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (25 002 593)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 14-Apr-2026
Summary: The Council was not at fault for withdrawing Mr X’s respite support. There was also no fault in the Council’s decision not to deviate from its charging policy. It was however at fault for a delay in carrying out a carer’s assessment and delaying the start of support for Mr X. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X to remedy the injustice caused.
-
London Borough of Ealing (25 003 579)
Statement Upheld Allocations 14-Apr-2026
Summary: We have found the Council at fault for its delay in completing a review of its decision about Miss X’s homelessness. We have also found the Council at fault for its inconsistent communication with Miss X during the same period. We find these faults caused injustice for Miss X and her child, meaning they experienced avoidable distress and uncertainty, and were deprived of suitable accommodation for longer than they otherwise would have been. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic financial remedy to recognise the injustice caused. There are parts of Miss X's complaint we have not investigated. We explain why in our statement.
-
Essex County Council (25 003 835)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 14-Apr-2026
Summary: The Council was at fault for delaying completing an Education, Health and Care needs assessment. The Council was not at fault for deciding not to put in place alternative education for a child. This meant the child had to wait longer to receive an Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments for the frustration and anxiety caused.