Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 56552 results

  • Essex County Council (25 007 175)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: Miss B complained the Council did not consider all evidence in reaching its safeguarding outcome. There was fault by the Council. It failed to communicate with Miss B about its consideration of the information she raised with it and explain why this did not change the safeguarding outcome. Miss B suffered distress and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss B, make a symbolic payment and issue a staff briefing.

  • Milton Keynes Council (25 007 440)

    Statement Not upheld Enforcement 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We do not find the Council at fault for the way it handled Mrs X’s allegations of planning breaches about a nearby building. The Council was entitled to decide there were no planning breaches.

  • Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (25 008 104)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We have completed an investigation into a complaint about the Council’s management of a case by its children’s services. We found the Council had communicated poorly at times with the complainant, Mrs E. But we found there was no outstanding injustice caused to her because it had apologised, which was a proportionate response for the distress caused.

  • Sheffield City Council (25 009 066)

    Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to take sufficient action to deal with anti-social behaviour and noise nuisance from her neighbour. She also complained the Council wrongly signposted her to the Housing Ombudsman Service when it issued its final response to her complaint. We find the Council was at fault for its communication with Miss X, which caused her frustration. However, it apologised for the injustice caused when it responded to the complaint. We do not recommend anything further. The Council was also at fault for referring Miss X to the Housing Ombudsman Service. This caused Miss X frustration, and she was put to time and trouble referring her complaint to the wrong organisation. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and implement a service improvement.

  • Norfolk County Council (25 010 841)

    Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly respond to her concerns about the Adult Social Care support for her neighbour. We have found no fault by the Council.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (25 013 302)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with her child. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s action to justify us investigating. It would also be reasonable for Miss X to pursue her other concerns with the Information Commissioner’s Office and the courts.

  • Somerset Council (25 014 774)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Rights of way 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to refund the full cost of a footpath diversion. The complaint is late and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (25 015 877)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Licensing 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council consulted on and advertised its process to introduce on-street stalls in a shopping area near where he lives. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to him by the matters complained of to warrant us investigating. We also cannot achieve the outcome he wants from his complaint.

  • London Borough of Croydon (25 016 072)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the educational provision made for Mrs X’s children while in the care of their father. This is because Mrs X has recently started court action to challenge the Council’s previous decisions about her children’s care, which were also subject to court action. The issue of her children’s educational provision is a matter that has been or could reasonably be raised in these court proceedings.

  • Essex County Council (25 016 209)

    Statement Upheld Charging 29-Mar-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council charging care fees for a period as there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation. We have upheld Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in responding to her emails about the charges. The Council has agreed to provide a proportionate remedy for the distress caused to Mrs X.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings