Local Government Ombudsman Logo

www.lgo.org.uk has experienced a problem

The website has encountered an error. The issue has been logged so that we can investigate the cause.

You can visit the home page and try browsing again. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.

You may still be able to use our online complaint service if you want to register a complaint or log into your account.

SearchResult - Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman

Decision search

What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 55054 results

  • Milton Keynes Council (25 009 726)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council failed to safeguard a child and breached Miss X’s data protection rights. This is because Miss X is not a suitable representative for the child involved and the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider her complaint about a data breach.

  • Darlington Borough Council (25 010 117)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with his requests for information. The Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with the matter.

  • London Borough of Enfield (25 011 966)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Leisure and culture 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delays in responding to a service request and complaint. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (25 012 111)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to Mrs X’s car from hitting a pothole in the road. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs X to pursue her claim for repair costs through the courts.

  • Transport for London (25 014 263)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about low emission zone penalty charge notices as they have been cancelled and there is insufficient remaining injustice caused to the complainant to warrant our further involvement.

  • East Sussex County Council (24 016 786)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: The Council was at fault for causing a short delay when deciding Ms X’s daughter’s special educational needs support. It also caused a delay in sending a copy of the support plan to Ms X. It has already apologised to Ms X and has made service improvements. It has now also agreed to offer her a small, symbolic payment to recognise her injustice.

  • Staffordshire County Council (24 017 165)

    Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: Ms C complains the Council has not assessed her care needs properly and Council commissioned care agencies were inadequate. There was no significant injustice caused by the care agencies commissioned by the Council and no fault in the Council’s decision to reduce services.

  • Suffolk County Council (24 017 247)

    Statement Upheld Other 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to act on safeguarding concerns, delayed providing support for his disabled son, and restricted the investigation of his concerns. The Council was at fault in how it responded to safeguarding concerns, delayed support under a Child in Need assessment, and handled both the complaints process and the Stage 2 investigation. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (24 017 686)

    Statement Upheld Charging 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: Ms C complains the Council commissioned care provider, Bio Luminuex Healthcare Ltd, failed to provide suitable care and falsified records. Ms C also complains the Council failed to provide proper support for her mother, Mrs D, after she left a care home. The Council is at fault for failing to properly assess Mrs D’s needs before she returned to the community and for inadequate services it commissioned. To put things right the Council has agreed to waive an existing invoice of over £1700, apologise to Mrs D and Ms C for the distress and frustration its actions caused; and make service improvements which include the quality monitoring of the care provider.

  • London Borough of Newham (24 019 833)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 21-Oct-2025

    Summary: Ms X uses a personal budget to pay for her child’s special educational needs provision in school. The Council failed to provide Ms X with a right of review when it decided to end her child’s personal budget. The Council also failed to ensure Ms X was sent a direct payment agreement in advance, setting out how the budget should be used. Ms X’s child did not miss out on any provision because of these faults. However the Council’s actions have caused Ms X frustration and uncertainty. To recognise the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and take action to improve its services.

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