Decision search
Your search has 115 results
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 005 094)
Statement Not upheld Noise 23-Apr-2021
Summary: Ms X complained about noise and vibration nuisance from a factory near her home. She is unhappy at the lack of action taken by the Council, and with the conduct of the investigating officer. The Ombudsman found the Council was not at fault in the way it investigated Ms X’s complaints of noise nuisance.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 005 471)
Statement Upheld Residential care 16-Apr-2021
Summary: Mrs X complained about the care Mrs Y received and how the Council carried out a safeguarding investigation. She says this caused harm to Mrs Y and caused her stress and anxiety. The Council was at fault for failing to ensure the Care Provider made proper records of Mrs Y’s personal care and responded appropriately to Mrs Y’s falls. This caused Mrs X distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise and reminds staff of the correct procedures.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 012 608)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 08-Apr-2021
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint made against a local councillor. We will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence to suggest there has been fault by the Council which has caused Mr X injustice.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 005 610)
Statement Upheld Friends and family carers 07-Apr-2021
Summary: Miss X complains that the Council failed to provide financial support when she agreed to accommodate a child. She says its communication and complaint handling were poor. The Council has agreed it is at fault and has caused injustice. It has agreed a financial remedy and service reviews.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 011 234)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 23-Mar-2021
Summary: Mr X complained about damage caused to his home from traffic vibration due to the location of a pedestrian refuge in the highway opposite his property. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint. This is because it is reasonable for him to seek a remedy by way of insurers or the courts for the damage to his property.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 004 864)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 11-Mar-2021
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the actions of the Council regarding her father’s, Mr C’s, financial assessment. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 007 030)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Covid-19 09-Feb-2021
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a Government grant for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (19 019 814)
Statement Upheld Safeguarding 27-Jan-2021
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to safeguard her late mother at Springfield Park Nursing Home and failed to deal properly with her safeguarding concerns. There was a failure to follow the seizure management plan and a delay in calling an ambulance. Although we cannot say this caused harm to Mrs X's mother, the Council needs to apologise to Mrs X for the distress caused and the time and trouble it has put her to.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (20 009 247)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 26-Jan-2021
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (19 016 531)
Statement Upheld Residential care 22-Jan-2021
Summary: The complaint relates to the Council’s decision to change the way it provided support to Ms D which led to a reduction in the support package that Ms D received. The Council has assessed Ms D’s needs and provided a replacement support package, but there was a lack of clarity in how the Council assessed that the initial care package met Ms D’s needs. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms D and pays her £150.