Decision search
Your search has 54735 results
-
Manchester City Council (24 022 775)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 15-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a safeguarding referral about his family. The law prevents us from investigating anything that is or has been the subject of court proceedings. We are also unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Council’s action following Mr X’s arrest.
-
Lancashire County Council (24 022 828)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 15-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s response to her concerns about the care and welfare of her grandchildren. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to accept her complaint because she does not have parental responsibility for the children.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 022 901)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 15-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway maintenance because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to approach the courts about the matter, who are better placed to consider the complaint.
-
Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (25 000 470)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Friends and family carers 15-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about payment of fostering allowances. This is because the complaint is late, and there is no good reason for the delay in complaining to us.
-
Birmingham City Council (25 001 009)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not supporting him because there is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice.
-
Bristol City Council (25 001 808)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a data breach as the Information Commissioner's Office is best placed to assess the Council's response and compensation can be sought in court.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 011 010)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 15-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that he remained living in unsuitable temporary accommodation for over 12 months, despite the Council agreeing to move him. He also complained about delay in the Council’s complaints process. We upheld both parts of the complaint, finding the Council at fault for not re-housing Mr X sooner and for delay in responding to his complaint. These faults caused distress to Mr X and meant he lived in unsuitable accommodation for far longer than he should have. The Council has accepted these findings. At the end of this statement, I set out action the Council has agreed to remedy this injustice caused to Mr X and improve its service.
-
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (24 011 178)
Statement Upheld Allocations 15-May-2025
Summary: Ms C complained that the Council failed to properly consider her medical conditions in refusing her request to bid on bungalows or houses. We found that the Council had not properly considered Ms C’s mental health condition or explained its reasons for discounting the medical evidence provided by her doctors. The Council has agreed to reconsider these points in a further review of her medical needs.
-
Oxfordshire County Council (24 011 571)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 15-May-2025
Summary: Ms O complained on behalf of Ms X that the Council delayed issuing an education, health and care plan, and failed to provide Ms X’s child with suitable full-time education. Ms O said this caused Ms X distress, it took time, had a financial impact, and meant her child missed out on education. We find the Council at fault for delays issuing the plan which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to make a payment to remedy this injustice.
-
Worcestershire County Council (24 011 770)
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 15-May-2025
Summary: Mr Y complained the Council failed to ensure Mr X’s care provider assigned regular drivers for his mobility car, delayed providing Mr X with medication, failed to ensure Mr X received appropriate personal care, delayed arranging a repair of Mr X’s toilet, allowed the care provider to slander him and delayed considering his complaint. There is some evidence Mr X missed out on access to the community, of missed medication, of inadequate records of bathing and of delay responding to the complaint. An apology, payment to Mr X and Mr Y, alongside procedural remedies, is satisfactory remedy.