Decision search
Your search has 53874 results
-
Royal Borough of Greenwich (24 015 539)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 02-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council handled an annual review of her child’s (Y) Education, Health and Care Plan. Mrs X also complained the Council poorly communicated with her and it failed to provide Y with suitable education when he finished his placement at his previous college. There were faults by the Council which caused injustice to Y and Mrs X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.
-
West Sussex County Council (24 017 146)
Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 02-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s refusal of his vehicle crossover application. We found fault in the way the Council considered Mr X’s application. This fault caused him injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise and respond to Mr X’s appeal.
-
Babergh District Council (24 017 525)
Statement Not upheld Planning applications 02-Jul-2025
Summary: X complained they were misled by the Council when they submitted a request for pre-application advice before making their planning application to demolish a barn and build a new house. X said that, because of this, they incurred greater costs which the Council should pay. We found no fault in the way the Council has acted.
-
Milton Keynes Council (24 018 546)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 02-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed completing her child (Y’s) Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment in line with statutory timescales. This in turn caused a delay in issuing the EHC Plan. The Council was at fault as it failed to issue Y’s EHC Plan within the statutory timescales, caused by a delay in obtaining Educational Psychologist advice. The Council has agreed to make a payment to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 019 100)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 02-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council did not review her child Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan in line with the statutory guidance and failed to identify a new school placement when Y’s school said it could no longer meet their needs in 2023. The Council was at fault. Y missed out on some of their specialist educational provision for three terms which caused Ms X avoidable frustration and uncertainty. The Council will apologise, make payments to remedy the injustice and issue its decision following an annual review of Y’s EHC Plan in December 2024 without further delay.
-
North Somerset Council (24 020 425)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 02-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council investigated Ms X’s safeguarding concerns about a relative. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
-
London Borough of Islington (24 021 714)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 02-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application from November 2023 because there is insufficient injustice caused to justify our involvement.
-
City of York Council (24 021 971)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Housing benefit and council tax benefit 02-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a housing benefit overpayment because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
-
Lincolnshire County Council (24 022 347)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 02-Jul-2025
Summary: We have upheld Mr B’s complaint about delay responding to his complaint about his care and support arrangements. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused. The Council will investigate Mr B’s complaint within eight weeks, apologise to him and pay him £150 for the frustration and distress caused.
-
London Borough of Merton (24 022 984)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 02-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his grandfather’s care charges. He says his grandfather was told he would receive six weeks of care for free to support his recovery following discharge from hospital, but he was charged. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the claimed fault has not caused any significant injustice.