What do complaints teach us about end of life care?

See our latest report on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.

Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 58275 results

  • Devon County Council (26 007 325)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 28-Jun-2026

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council is wasting public money by undertaking highway works in an inefficient manner. This is because the alleged fault affects all or most residents, and Mr B has not suffered a significant personal injustice.

  • Westminster City Council (26 007 425)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 28-Jun-2026

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because he appealed to London Tribunals.

  • Arun District Council (26 008 802)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Refuse and recycling 28-Jun-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that his car was damaged by a refuse vehicle. This is because it is reasonable for him to pursue the matter through the courts.

  • Bracknell Forest Council (25 013 737)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 28-Jun-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the priority band the Council awarded on its housing register. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement. The Council accepted it delayed carrying out a review of Mr X’s priority band, for which it has apologised. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (24 019 220)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 25-Jun-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection concerns because we could not add to any previous investigation by the Council.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (25 004 481)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Jun-2026

    Summary: The Council was at fault for delay issuing Miss X’s child’s Education, Health and Care plan, for failing to have appropriate oversight over the child’s alternative education, and for its poor communication and complaint handling. This caused Miss X uncertainty, frustration and distress. The Council has apologised and offered Miss X a payment.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 008 046)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 25-Jun-2026

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to complete property adaptations needed for the safety of a child, Y, who she cares for under a Special Guardianship Order. The Council was at fault for significant delays approving funding for the agreed building work. The Council agreed to offer a further financial remedy for the prolonged distress to Miss X and her household.

  • Wakefield Metropolitan District Council (25 009 540)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Jun-2026

    Summary: The Council delayed in completing the annual review of Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. The Council’s fault caused Y lost educational provision and their mother, Ms X, frustration. The Council was also at fault in its handling of Ms X’s complaint, causing her confusion. The Council should agree remedies to recognise the injustice caused. The Council failed to send Ms X a copy of its Personal Budget policy, but this did not cause her injustice. The Council was not at fault when it refused to allow Ms X to pay for activities using a prepaid card. I have ended my investigation into Ms X’s complaint that the Council issued a final amended EHC Plan without following the proper process because there is insufficient evidence that any fault by the Council caused injustice to Ms X or Y.

  • Milton Keynes Council (25 011 093)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 25-Jun-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council handled a Section 47 investigation following allegations made against him. He says the Council did not inform him an investigation was taking place, and it did not ask him for his views on the allegations. We found the Council at fault for failing to inform Mr X of the investigation and for poor record keeping. This caused him distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay a symbolic remedy, and take action to prevent this happening in future.

  • Slough Borough Council (25 012 560)

    Statement Upheld Allocations 25-Jun-2026

    Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to provide suitable and timely homelessness support to Miss X. It was also at fault for its poor communication and delayed complaint responses. The Council will apologise and make a symbolic payment to Miss X to acknowledge the avoidable distress and frustration caused by its faults.

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