Decision search
Your search has 55414 results
-
Manchester City Council (25 022 191)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 09-Jan-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a missed bulky waste collection. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
-
London Borough of Redbridge (24 018 741)
Statement Upheld Allocations 09-Jan-2026
Summary: The complaint is about the Council’s delay in moving Mr B and his family from unsuitable temporary accommodation. We find fault in the delay which was because of service failure. This meant the family lived (and continue to live) in unsuitable accommodation. The Council has agreed to our recommendations for actions to remedy the injustice.
-
London Borough of Enfield (24 020 330)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Mr X complained about a Notice to Quit his accommodation the Council served on him in April 2025. I ended this investigation because Mr X has filed a claim with the Court about the same matter. The law means we cannot investigate this complaint.
-
Kent County Council (24 020 560)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her education and special educational needs. We do not find the Council at fault regarding reimbursement of equipment. We do find the Council at fault for delay completing Miss X’s annual review, failing to act when it became aware she was out of education, failing to consider special educational provision, and failing to arrange advocacy support. These faults caused avoidable uncertainty and distress. The Council should apologise and make a payment to Miss X.
-
Surrey County Council (24 021 919)
Statement Upheld Other 09-Jan-2026
Summary: X complained about the Council’s communication with them about their application for a site plot and questioned if it fairly followed its allocation scheme. We found the Council at fault for poor communication, poor record keeping and failure to demonstrate transparency with its allocation decisions. This caused significant frustration and uncertainty to X. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic payment to recognise their injustice. It has agreed to review its allocation scheme and make changes to how it retains records when administering the scheme.
-
Hertfordshire County Council (24 022 426)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Mrs F complained the Council delayed issuing an education, health and care plan and failed to provide education or alternative provision and special educational needs provision for her son. We found fault. The Council has agreed to make a payment to remedy the injustice caused.
-
London Borough of Brent (24 022 990)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Miss X complained that the Council failed to provide education for her son when he had no school place. We find some fault resulting in the complainant’s son missing alternative education and causing Miss X avoidable frustration and time and trouble. We have recommended a way to remedy this injustice, which the Council has accepted. Therefore, we have completed our investigation and are closing the complaint.
-
Wychavon District Council (24 023 238)
Statement Upheld Enforcement 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take suitable enforcement action to ensure a developer implemented landscaping in accordance with approved plans. There was no fault in the Council’s decision-making. The Council was at fault for delay and some poor communication. However, its earlier apology to Mr X is sufficient remedy for the injustice.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 023 417)
Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Mr F complained the Council failed to provide him with a social worker or any care and support in autumn 2024. We found no fault.
-
Suffolk County Council (25 000 032)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 09-Jan-2026
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council was involved in a decision by the school attended by her child Y to stop offering specific educational provision, did not provide Y with suitable alternative education when she could not attend school, failed to meet timescales in an education, health and care needs assessment process and had poor standards of communication. We find the Council at fault for the way it decided if it should offer alternative education, and for missing statutory timescales in the assessment process. This caused injustice to Mrs X and Y of distress, uncertainty and frustration. The Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to remedy the injustice.