Decision search
Your search has 59747 results
-
Hertfordshire County Council (25 013 309)
Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 17-Aug-2026
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to deliver provision in her son, Y’s, Education Health and Care (EHC) Plan. She says this distressed her family and Y missed provision. We are discontinuing our investigation. We have already investigated Mrs X’s complaint and cannot add anything to the previous investigation.
-
Essex County Council (25 015 068)
Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 17-Aug-2026
Summary: There was no fault by the Council during the period that is in the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to investigate. The Council put in place alternative provision and changed the provision three times when the child did not engage.
-
Lincolnshire County Council (25 015 682)
Statement Not upheld School transport 17-Aug-2026
Summary: Mr F complained about the way the Council changed his son’s home to school transport in 2025. We found no fault.
-
Cambridgeshire County Council (25 016 061)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 17-Aug-2026
Summary: Mr F complained the Council failed to secure a suitable education for his daughter. We found fault which caused uncertainty about what provision could have been made in 2024/25 and delay in putting alternative provision in place which caused a loss of provision for one term in 2025/26. The Council has agreed to apologise and make symbolic payments to remedy that injustice.
-
Norfolk County Council (25 017 372)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 17-Aug-2026
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to take action to ensure it met her assessed eligible needs after she explained she was unable to use direct payments. It also failed to complete a reassessment of needs as offered in September 2025 in response to a complaint. The Council accepts it failed to complete a reassessment after cancelling the direct payments and then delayed completing this reassessment, causing uncertainty and distress. The Council proposed a suitable remedy after accepting fault in response to the Ombudsman’s enquiries which includes a symbolic payment, a reassessment and service improvements.
-
Bristol City Council (25 017 648)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 17-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to ban her from entering its libraries. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
-
Leeds City Council (25 017 918)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 17-Aug-2026
Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed completing his child, Y’s Education, Health and Care needs assessment and issuing a final EHC Plan. We found the Council at fault for delay, and for failing to provide Y with suitable education and the special educational provision they were entitled to. This caused Y to miss provision and caused Mr X avoidable uncertainty and distress. The Council has already provided a suitable remedy for the injustice caused, so we have not made any further recommendations.
-
London Borough of Newham (25 018 121)
Statement Upheld Other 17-Aug-2026
Summary: The Council failed to respond to and properly investigate Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of enforcement agents who visited his home to collect a Council tax debt. The Council agreed to apologise for the uncertainty this caused. There was no fault in how the Council instructed the agents to collect the debt.
-
Birmingham City Council (25 018 471)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 17-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s housing register application. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. We do not have the power to investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaints about mould and damp in his property.
-
London Borough of Camden (25 020 794)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 17-Aug-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a housing application. There is insufficient evidence of any significant injustice arising from its decision to change the priority of Mr X’s application.