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 52233 results

  • Milton Keynes Council (24 019 996)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 13-Mar-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a breach of planning control. This is because the complainant has a right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (24 020 183)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 13-Mar-2025

    Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s provision of temporary accommodation. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.

  • Hastings Borough Council (24 020 625)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Leisure and culture 13-Mar-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Ms X’s report of a breach of allotment rules by an allotment holder. There is no significant injustice, and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X is seeking.

  • Milton Keynes Council (24 020 765)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 13-Mar-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (24 020 829)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 13-Mar-2025

    Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to deliver her daughter J’s Education, Health and Care Plan in line with statutory timescales. We find fault with the Council for delay, and have agreed a symbolic payment for the distress and frustration caused to Miss X.

  • Tandridge District Council (24 002 983)

    Statement Not upheld Other 12-Mar-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council decided to close an enforcement case against a neighbouring property. She said the Council misinterpreted the Ombudsman’s recommendations and did not account for all relevant factors in its decision-making. We have not found the Council acted with fault in its decision-making. We cannot therefore question the decision the Council made. The Council has confirmed it would consider any new reports or evidence it receives.

  • Manchester City Council (24 004 809)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 12-Mar-2025

    Summary: Ms X complained that the Council failed to provide alternative education to her son after he was unable to attend school for medical reasons, and that there were delays in completing an Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused a loss of education and avoidable distress. We find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to make symbolic payments for the lost education and avoidable distress, and to review its policy on providing pupils out of school alternative education.

  • Lincolnshire County Council (24 007 388)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 12-Mar-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to consider his concerns that his child (Y) is a victim of Fabricated or Induced Illness (FII) by Proxy and prevented them from being assessed for it despite providing supporting evidence. He says his child is at risk of harm which has caused him distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council consulted medical professionals and considered Mr X’s concerns in line with the relevant policies without fault.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (24 007 998)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 12-Mar-2025

    Summary: Mr W, on behalf of the family, complained the Council failed to assess Mr X’s capacity or consult his parents before deciding to extend his respite stay. Mr W also complained about delays and lack of action in response to safeguarding concerns. We find the Council at fault for delay informing the family of the safeguarding outcome, which caused uncertainty. The Council has agreed to issue an apology.

  • Durham County Council (24 008 210)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 12-Mar-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to ensure her child D, a young adult with disabilities, received suitable education and support for their special educational needs. There was fault by the Council which caused D to miss special educational needs support. It also caused distress to D and Mrs X. The Council agreed to apologise and pay a financial remedy. It will also review why it delayed in completing an Education, Health, and Care needs assessment in D’s case and produce an action plan to prevent recurrence of the same fault.

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