Decision search
Your search has 53111 results
-
Staffordshire County Council (24 013 429)
Statement Upheld Charging 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs Y complained about the Council’s charging under a Deferred Payment Agreement for the residential care service for her mother. We found fault with the Council in not providing enough information about Deferred Payment Agreements and in the way it calculated care charges. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Mrs Y. The Council has already offered suitable personal remedies and has carried out some service improvements. The Council has agreed to continue improving its services by ensuring more comprehensive information is available for people considering Deferred Payment Agreements.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 014 076)
Statement Upheld School transport 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr P complains his son was not awarded dedicated home to school transport when the family moved. We find fault with the Council for failing to consider the information Mr P provided, causing him frustration and uncertainty. We have agreed the Council do the appeal again.
-
Kent County Council (24 014 235)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 22-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in providing information about transport assistance and dealing with Mrs X’s complaint. Mrs X’s son is not entitled to school transport, and she can still appeal this decision or apply to a bursary fund. Therefore, we do not consider Mrs X has suffered sufficient injustice currently to warrant an investigation.
-
Teignbridge District Council (24 014 833)
Statement Not upheld Planning applications 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr B complained about the Council’s handling of a planning application relating to a development near his property. He complains the Council should not have granted the applicants planning permission. We should not investigate this complaint further. We would be unlikely to recommend a remedy, achieve a meaningful outcome for Mr B, or find evidence of fault in the decision-making process.
-
London Borough of Lewisham (24 015 600)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Miss X complained the Council did not consider all relevant information in her homelessness application, delayed providing her with suitable accommodation and communicated with her poorly. She says this caused her to be homeless. The Ombudsman finds no fault with the Council’s decision making in assessing Miss X’s homelessness application and suitability of accommodation it provided. The Ombudsman does find fault with the Council’s communication, which caused Miss X limited injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and make a service improvement.
-
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 796)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 22-Jul-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council supporting the separation of Miss X from her children and the placing of them with a person she says is a perpetrator. A court has decided where her children should live, and the matters she complains of either were or could reasonably have been mentioned during those proceedings. A permanent legal bar now prevents us investigating this complaint.
-
Swindon Borough Council (24 016 013)
Statement Upheld Other 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council has failed to adequately meet Miss Y’s care and support needs, and to safeguard her from neglect and abuse. We found the Council’s failure to hold a safeguarding planning meeting or complete comprehensive risk assessments was fault. As was the failure to ensure Miss Y received all of the support set out in her support plan. These faults have caused Miss Y and Mrs X an injustice. The Council will apologise and make payments to Miss Y and Mrs X to remedy this.
-
Kent County Council (24 016 495)
Statement Not upheld Charging 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms D complained the Council did not explain what a third party top up is or explain how the fees for respite care for her mother, Ms M, was calculated. This caused her financial and emotional distress. The Council is not at fault. It explained the fees to Ms D.
-
Surrey County Council (24 016 713)
Statement Upheld Disabled children 22-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council has delivered social care for Y. The Council was at fault for not commencing a stage two statutory investigation under the Children Act 1989, causing distress, uncertainty and frustration to Mrs X. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to recognise the uncertainty, conduct a stage two investigation, and act to prevent recurrence.
-
Shropshire Council (24 016 744)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 22-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with breaches of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.