Decision search
Your search has 56552 results
-
Herefordshire Council (25 028 986)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 25-Mar-2026
Summary: We will not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of a councillor as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council.
-
Central Bedfordshire Council (25 030 162)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 25-Mar-2026
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a missed refuse collection. This is because Mr B has not suffered a significant injustice which would justify our involvement.
-
Essex County Council (25 030 292)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 25-Mar-2026
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged after hitting a pothole which the Council had failed to repair. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
-
Mid Devon District Council (25 031 422)
Statement Upheld Council tax 25-Mar-2026
Summary: We have upheld Ms Y’s complaint about the Council’s pursuit of council tax debts. The Council have agreed to a suitable remedy.
-
London Borough of Lewisham (25 004 042)
Statement Upheld Allocations 24-Mar-2026
Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly removed him from its housing register and failed to provide him with interim accommodation following a homelessness application. Mr X also complained about delays in the Council’s complaint handling. Mr X says the Council’s actions caused significant harm to his mental and physical health and negatively impacted his relationship with his children. We found fault by the Council. The Council has agreed to provide an apology and financial remedy to Mr X and reconsider his request for a review regarding his eligibility to be placed on the housing register.
-
Essex County Council (25 004 905)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 24-Mar-2026
Summary: We have found the Council at fault for its poor communication about the alternative provision available to Mrs X’s son. We also found fault with the Council for delays during the post-16 annual review process. This fault caused avoidable distress to Mrs X and her son. The Council has agreed apologise and make a symbolic payment.
-
London Borough of Islington (25 005 130)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 24-Mar-2026
Summary: Mr X complained that the Council had failed to ensure his son’s school adhered to his Education, Health and Care Plan, and had delayed in dealing with Mr X’s complaint. We consider the Council investigated Mr X’s concerns properly and we accept its decision that there had been some fault. However, we do not find the resulting injustice is as claimed by Mr X and that an apology is sufficient remedy. We have therefore completed our investigation and are closing the complaint.
-
South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 005 265)
Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 24-Mar-2026
Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s decision to propose a step lift instead of a wheelchair ramp for Mr Y in 2023 which met his needs and was in line with relevant guidance. However, there was poor communication to Mr Y and Mrs X from the Council around the reasons why it decided not to install the ramp. The Council agreed to apologise for the frustration and uncertainty caused.
-
Derby City Council (25 005 305)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 24-Mar-2026
Summary: We upheld a complaint from Mrs D that the Council delayed in issuing her daughter with an Education, Health and Care Plan. We also found some avoidable delay with the Council’s complaint handling. These faults caused some injustice to Mrs D and her daughter causing distress and putting her to unnecessary time and trouble. The Council has accepted these findings and at the end of this statement, we set out action it agreed to take to remedy that injustice.
-
London Borough of Merton (25 005 663)
Statement Upheld Council tax 24-Mar-2026
Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it took recovery action for Ms X’s council tax debt. The Council was at fault when it failed to provide body camera footage when Ms X requested it, for an error in its complaint response to Ms X and when its Enforcement Agents chased a payment she had already made but this did not cause her a significant injustice.