Decision search
Your search has 59748 results
-
Gloucestershire County Council (25 017 532)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 03-Sep-2026
Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to complete an Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her son within statutory timeframes, and he did not receive full-time education during this. We found the Council at fault for delays and for not properly considering elements of its alternative provision duty. This caused significant frustration, distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and make symbolic payments to recognise the injustice caused.
-
Suffolk County Council (25 018 786)
Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 03-Sep-2026
Summary: Miss X complained the Council did not complete her child’s Education Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales. She said this impacted her child’s education and caused avoidable distress to her child and wider family. We have ended our investigation because the Council has offered an appropriate remedy and there is nothing further an investigation could add.
-
London Borough of Southwark (25 019 277)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 03-Sep-2026
Summary: The Council was at fault for not completing a suitability review when Ms X told it about her change in circumstances and for the time taken to move her from unsuitable temporary accommodation. Ms X has spent a significant amount of time in accommodation which is unsuitable for her. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise the time spent in unsuitable accommodation.
-
London Borough of Bromley (25 019 461)
Statement Upheld Council tax 03-Sep-2026
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his mother’s, Ms Y’s, council tax account and its failure to offer an appropriate remedy when it upheld his complaint about such. The Council was at fault. It failed to reinstate the direct debit for the payment of Ms Y’s council tax. There were also other errors and inaccuracies by the Council. As a result, Ms Y received an avoidable court summons, and she suffered distress and worry. Mr X suffered frustration. The Council will make symbolic payments and send us evidence of service improvements it says it is making.
-
London Borough of Lewisham (25 020 949)
Statement Not upheld Transport 03-Sep-2026
Summary: Mr X complained the Council has wrongly refused his application for a Blue Badge. We found no fault in the way the Council assessed Mr X’s applications and made its decisions.
-
Kent County Council (25 022 884)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 03-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his safeguarding concerns and its refusal to amend the minutes of a Child in Need meeting. There is insufficient evidence of fault and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
-
West Suffolk Council (25 022 909)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 03-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mr X’s housing application. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
-
London Borough of Lewisham (25 024 529)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 03-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of Miss X's housing application, because further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
-
Luton Borough Council (25 024 673)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 03-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council recorded information following a safeguarding assessment or how it handled his complaint. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider this complaint and we will not investigate complaint handling as a stand-alone issue.
-
Slough Borough Council (25 024 743)
Statement Upheld Allocations 03-Sep-2026
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with Mr X’s housing application. This is because some issues are late and there is no good reason to look at them now, and the issue that is in time has already been upheld and proportionately remedied by the Council.