Decision search
Your search has 54029 results
-
Transport for London (24 021 232)
Report Upheld Other 09-Oct-2025
Summary: We have found Transport for London’s (TfL) operation of its vehicle scrappage schemes failed to: be open, accountable and transparent about its process for handling applications to these schemes; and follow a proper process for making, and publicising, changes to the schemes’ terms and conditions and their operation. This has caused uncertainty and misled the public about the way it administers and determines applications to these schemes.
-
Leicester City Council (24 005 927)
Report Upheld Homelessness 09-Oct-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to provide sufficient support with his homelessness and housing application and that it also failed to provide suitable accommodation for him and his family. As a result, Mr X and his family have been living in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary which has caused significant distress. Mr X also considers that this has been detrimental to the health and development of his children.
-
London Borough of Ealing (24 010 877)
Statement Upheld Allocations 09-Oct-2025
Summary: We found fault on Mrs Y’s homeless complaint about the Council’s decision to end the housing duty it owed her. It delayed identifying she had not been evicted from her property, failed to realise the significance of the tenancy agreement when she first sent it, failed to tell her she had review rights against its decision she was not homeless, and failed to act on her request for a statutory review of her accommodation’s suitability. It delayed responding to her complaint. The Council agreed to send her a written apology; reissue the decision and set out her review rights; back date any increased priority and carry out a suitability review should the review find in her favour; review why it failed to decide it owed her no main housing duty sooner; review why there was a delay responding to her complaint. It also agreed to pay her £100 for the delays with her complaint. These actions remedy the injustice caused. There was no fault on her complaint about it reducing her banding or about it failing to find her alternative suitable accommodation.
-
Wiltshire Council (24 012 477)
Statement Upheld Enforcement 09-Oct-2025
Summary: There was fault by the Council, because of delays in its complaint handling and in its decision to open a planning enforcement investigation. The Council has agreed to apologise for this. However, a delay in sending formal confirmation of the enforcement investigation did not represent an injustice to the complainant; and we have discontinued our investigation, about the way the Council dealt with alleged breaches of a construction management plan, because we cannot make a meaningful finding.
-
St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (24 014 862)
Statement Upheld Residential care 09-Oct-2025
Summary: We found fault by Broadoak Manor Care Home (acting on behalf of St Helen’s Metropolitan Borough Council) in the care it provided to Mrs X. This caused her husband, Mr X, distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and take action to prevent similar problems occurring in future.
-
Mersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (24 014 862a)
Statement Not upheld General practice 09-Oct-2025
Summary: We found fault by Broadoak Manor Care Home (acting on behalf of St Helen’s Metropolitan Borough Council) in the care it provided to Mrs X. This caused her husband, Mr X, distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and take action to prevent similar problems occurring in future.
-
London Borough of Enfield (24 016 079)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 09-Oct-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on a homelessness application and its ending of temporary accommodation provision. It was reasonable for Ms X to use the review/appeals procedure provided by the homeless legislation to challenge the Council’s decision.
-
Cheshire West & Chester Council (24 016 212)
Statement Upheld Charging 09-Oct-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to complete a financial assessment and confirm the care contribution before it started his mother’s care and support package. He also complained the Council has refused to cancel the care package despite repeated requests from him and his mother. We find the Council was at fault for its delay in completing the financial assessment. This caused avoidable distress. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and his mother and implement a service improvement.
-
Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (24 016 294)
Statement Upheld Other 09-Oct-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of becoming his appointee and how it communicated and supported him in the process. He said as a result he experienced distress and uncertainty. We found fault by the Council for causing some delay, communicating poorly, and its complaints handling was unclear. The Council did take steps to mitigate the appointee process’s impact on Mr X. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to acknowledge the injustice Mr X experienced. It will also carry out a service improvement recommendation.
-
Exeter City Council (24 016 575)
Statement Not upheld Enforcement 09-Oct-2025
Summary: We have completed our investigation into how the Council dealt with Mr X’s reports of planning breaches and his complaint. This is because we find no fault in the way the Council made its planning enforcement decisions and handled Mr X’s complaint.