Decision search
Your search has 53111 results
-
Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (24 016 820)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Jul-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault for poor communication and delays in Mr X’s homeless application. Mr X experienced avoidable distress and financial loss as a result. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Mr X.
-
London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 016 996)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed acting on his homelessness application and he and his family were placed in unsuitable temporary accommodation. We found there were delays in acting on his application and Mr X’s family were placed in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation for 35 weeks longer than appropriate. We recommended an apology and a payment to recognise the impact of this.
-
Manchester City Council (24 017 059)
Statement Upheld Charging 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Miss X complained that the Council did not tell her that her late mother’s, Mrs T, placement at a nursing home required a third-party fee to be paid in addition to the Council’s payment to the care home which has left her with a significant care fees debt to pay. There was no fault by the Council with how it calculated and charged Mrs T for her nursing care fees. But there was fault by the Council’s for its slight delay in completing Mrs T’s financial assessment, but this caused no injustice to Mrs T. The Council was also at fault for its failure to take proactive steps to recover Mrs T’s accrued care fees debt. This caused an injustice to Miss X and the Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.
-
London Borough of Lambeth (24 017 762)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Street furniture and lighting 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice and the way the Council approached road sign placement. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right of appeal to London Tribunals. Additionally, there is not enough significant personal injustice to justify investigating a complaint about road sign placement.
-
London Borough of Newham (24 018 246)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr Y complains the Council did not properly consider the application for his child, D, to receive home to school transport. We find procedural fault which, on the balance of probabilities, meant the Council did not provide transport when it should have done. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment of £900 in recognition of the education D missed. The Council will also pay £500 in recognition of the avoidable distress caused to Mr Y and his family.
-
London Borough of Southwark (24 018 389)
Statement Upheld Allocations 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to add her child’s birth certificate to her housing application. The Council was at fault. It failed to add the birth certificate which meant Ms X was unable to bid on suitable properties for nearly two years. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X and make a payment to acknowledge the distress the delay caused. Additionally, the Council agreed to prioritise offering Ms X a suitable two-bedroom property as soon as possible.
-
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (24 018 522)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council, in respect of her child B’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan delayed holding the annual review, issuing an updated EHC Plan and putting the provision in place. We found the Council delayed holding and completing the annual review process, which caused Mrs X distress, uncertainty and financial hardship, and B to miss out on support. The Council has acknowledged fault and agreed to a suitable remedy.
-
Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 018 697)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 28-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Miss X’s housing application. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Kingston Upon Hull City Council (24 018 813)
Statement Upheld Other 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr Y complains about the Council’s involvement with his family following a referral it received regarding his young child. There is fault because the Council did not speak with Mr Y about the referral and then created a safety plan which was one-sided and contained assumptions about Mr Y’s ability to parent. This caused avoidable and significant distress which the Council has already remedied with an apology, a symbolic payment of £1350 and reminders to relevant staff. This is an appropriate remedy.
-
Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (24 019 512)
Statement Upheld Direct payments 28-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council changed the expenses it allowed under direct payments and its communication with him about this was poor. We upheld the complaint because communication was not in line with our expected standards. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment and issue Mr X with a comprehensive statement about the expenses the Council allows for Mr Y’s direct payment based on his current care and support plan.