Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 55414 results

  • London Borough of Camden (25 022 787)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to reject Miss X’s homelessness application. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.

  • Surrey County Council (25 022 925)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

  • South Staffordshire District Council (25 023 041)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s response to a safety risk at a Council car park which he has reported. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

  • Staffordshire County Council (24 021 918)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not issue an updated Education, Health and Care Plan for his child, Y after an annual review in August 2024. He also complained about poor communication from the Council. We found fault by the Council on both parts of Mr X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the impact of Y’s missed provision and the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused.

  • Suffolk County Council (25 001 384)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to complete her child’s Education, Health and Care Plan within the statutory timescales. We find the Council at fault for delay, which caused uncertainty and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X. It should also review its action plan to ensure Education, Health and Care Plan writing is conducted in line with the timescales set out in statutory guidance.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (25 001 433)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: The Council was at fault for delaying assessing Ms X for adaptations to her property. As a result Ms X has not been able to wash properly and has had to wait much longer than she should for the Council to agree to adaptations. To remedy the injustice caused the Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, make a payment to her to recognise the delays she experienced and carry out a service improvement.

  • Salford City Council (25 001 458)

    Statement Upheld Council tax 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: The Council was at fault. It failed to inform Mr X it would not proceed with his Council Tax disability band reduction application if he failed to provide information it requested. Although this did not cause Mr X an injustice the Council agreed to make service improvements to prevent this happening again to other applicants. There was no fault in how it handled Mr X’s Blue Badge application.

  • Stevenage Borough Council (25 001 485)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to take sufficient action to provide accommodation that meets the needs of her family. The Council failed to take timely action once it was determined that her current property could not be adapted to meet her needs meaning Mrs X has been living in accommodation without proper washing and sleeping facilities impacting on her mental and physical health. As well as exploring all possibilities to find alternative accommodation the Council will make Mrs X a symbolic payment.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (25 002 168)

    Statement Upheld Other 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his son, Y’s care. The Council was at fault for incorrectly making an early referral and giving Mr X confusing information about panel attendees. This caused Mr X frustration. The Council has agreed to arrange a stage three panel to remedy this.

  • London Borough of Enfield (25 002 343)

    Statement Upheld Council tax 13-Jan-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not apply his single person council tax discount and wrongly instructed enforcement agents to take debt recovery action against him. He also complained about poor communication from the Council. The Council was not at fault for the way it handled Mr X’s council tax account or for instructing enforcement agents. The Council was at fault for its lack of communication with Mr X, which caused him distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings