Decision search
Your search has 115 results
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 006 252)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Domiciliary care 01-Sep-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged damage to Mr X’s bin by a carer. It is reasonable for Mr X to instead raise the issue with the Council’s insurers, and then refer it to the small claims court if the Council does not agree to compensate him.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 004 722)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 26-Jul-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about care provided to the late Mrs C. This is because we could not add to the Care Provider’s responses even if we investigated. Mrs B can ask the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to consider whether she should have access to the information she says she wants but has not received from the late Mrs C’s Care Provider, and it would be reasonable for her to do so.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 003 949)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 19-Jul-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to force the complainant’s neighbour to cut back their hedge. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complainant has been dealt with by a Housing Association which is not in our jurisdiction.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (22 003 072)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Friends and family carers 23-Jun-2022
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the reduction in a special guardianship allowance paid to him as there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant this.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (21 012 563)
Statement Upheld Charging 19-Jun-2022
Summary: Mr and Mrs B say the Council failed to provide appropriate advice and support about funding and care options in 2020, failed to carry out a continuing healthcare assessment, failed to review the case, delayed identifying a suitable home when Mrs B was in hospital, delayed responding to the complaint and failed to identify any lessons from the complaint. The Council failed to carry out a continuing healthcare assessment and failed to explain what action it had taken to address the issues identified. Procedural changes and training already taken or planned, alongside an apology and payment to Mr B is satisfactory remedy.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (21 004 293)
Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 25-Apr-2022
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of various matters surrounding the care needs of, and care home placement for, his mother. The complaint was closed because we did not find fault by the Council in the matters raised by Mr X.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (21 006 231)
Statement Upheld Charging 12-Apr-2022
Summary: Ms X complained on behalf of her son, Mr Y, about care and support charges from the Council. She said the Council sent two years’ worth of invoices to Mr Y, who did not know he had to contribute to the cost of his care as no one from the Council spoke to him about it. The Ombudsman found fault causing injustice because the Council failed to maintain a proper oversight of Mr Y’s care and support and failed to carry out adequate financial reviews.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (21 007 009)
Statement Not upheld School admissions 15-Mar-2022
Summary: Mr X complained that the Council did not provide him with sufficient information and support when he was making an online application for a place for his child at his preferred primary school. I found no evidence of fault by the Council and no fault in the way the Independent Appeal Panel considered his infant class size appeal.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 014 052)
Statement Upheld Residential care 07-Feb-2022
Summary: Mr B and Mr C complain about the care their late mother Mrs D received from a Council-funded care home, from district nurses and from a mental health outreach team. They also complain the Council delayed re-assessing her needs. We found the Home failed to properly manage Mrs D’s leg condition and her continence needs. The Home and Council delayed too long in arranging to re‑assess Mrs D’s care needs. Mrs D is likely to have suffered preventable harm and distress due to these faults. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B and Mr C for the distress they have suffered, and to work with the Home to make service improvements. We did not find fault in Mrs D’s care from the district nurses or mental health outreach team.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 011 479)
Statement Upheld Safeguarding 26-Jan-2022
Summary: We have found in the Council’s actions as the Council failed to provide Ms B with the review report it had promised to deliver. There were also delays in the process and there was poor communication during and after the review. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms B, have a meeting with Ms B and pay a financial remedy.