Decision search
Your search has 52298 results
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 016 203)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to investigate her safeguarding complaints in full. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. Mrs X has made her complaint late outside of our usual 12 month time limit for accepting complaints. I see no good reason for us to investigate now.
-
Warwickshire County Council (24 016 259)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Alternative provision 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to make alternative educational provision for the complainant’s son. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.
-
Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council (24 016 322)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation of a private kennels licensing conditions. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 016 366)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of tenancy conditions in a building which it owns. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
-
Oxfordshire County Council (24 016 467)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decisions to deny the complainant’s requests for specialist educational placements for her daughter. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) against these decisions, and it was reasonable for her to use that right.
-
London Borough of Wandsworth (24 016 497)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) liability and charges made by the Council. This is because it is reasonable for the complainant to use their rights of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and Valuation Office Agency.
-
Central Bedfordshire Council (24 020 163)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 21-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint that his motorcycle was significantly damaged by a road defect which the Council had failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Mr C to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
-
Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 001 193)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 20-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the care provided to her late husband, Mr Y, at the Council commissioned care home. There was fault in the care home’s failure to ensure Mr Y’s medication was reviewed when he struggled with swallowing. It has already apologised for the uncertainty this caused. It also failed to ensure it kept all Mr Y’s records. The Council has agreed to ensure the care home has taken action to prevent a recurrence of these faults. There was no fault in the way the Council identified the placement or charged Mr Y for his care.
-
Grey Gables (New Milton) Ltd (24 001 663)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 20-Feb-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a care provider refusing to provide a copy of her mother in law’s contract and care invoices. This is because there is another body better placed to consider the complaint.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 002 363)
Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 20-Feb-2025
Summary: Mr C complains about delays in adaptations for his father, Mr D. The Council is at fault for failing to properly approve a grant application and in its communication with Mr C. This has resulted in delays in Mr D’s adaptations, and caused Mr C frustration, time and trouble. To remedy the complaint the Council has agreed to make an apology, symbolic financial payment and service improvements.