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 52042 results

  • Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (23 021 417)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: The complainant says she went to the Council when her family was homeless. The officer gave her incorrect advice and forced them into private rented accommodation. The result is they are living in accommodation they cannot afford. This has affected the complainant’s mental health. Our decision is there was no fault in the Council’s offer of accommodation. But there was some fault in the Council’s complaint handling, so we have upheld the complaint.

  • London Borough of Hackney (24 000 618)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council when it decided not to progress with a safeguarding enquiry when Mrs B fell. There was fault, however, when the Council took too long to review Mrs B’s care needs as intended, and took too long to deal with the complaint made on her behalf about this. The Council’s shortcomings caused both Mrs B and her family distress, frustration and uncertainty. It has agreed to take action to remedy this.

  • East Sussex County Council (24 001 308)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to act in his child’s best interests when choosing a suitable secondary school, arranging alternative education, and arranging school transport. There was no fault in the Council’s decision-making on these issues. We did not investigate the Council’s earlier decision to name a mainstream school in Mr X’s child’s Education, Health and Care Plan, as this came with appeal rights. The Council was at fault for refusing to reimburse fees Mr X paid to an independent school to secure his child’s place. The Council agreed to reimburse the fees.

  • Hallmark Care Homes (Banstead) Limited (24 001 768)

    Statement Upheld Residential care 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs C complains the Care Provider failed to properly care for her late mother, Mrs D, which resulted in her having to go into hospital where she died shortly after. There was service failure by the Care Provider which caused Mrs D and Mrs C distress and uncertainty. To remedy the complaint the Care Provider has agreed to apologise, refund money to Mrs D’s estate, and make service improvements.

  • West Sussex County Council (24 003 190)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan for her child. She also complained and about a lack of support and poor communication during the assessment process. The Council was at fault for delay issuing the final Education, Health and Care Plan. It was also at fault for delay responding to Mrs X’s stage two complaint. It agreed to provide a remedy for the avoidable frustration and uncertainty Mrs X suffered. The Council was not at fault in its consideration of alternative provision for Y.

  • Staffordshire County Council (24 003 255)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: We upheld a complaint about delay issuing Y’s final Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council will apologise and make a payment of £700 to reflect the avoidable frustration, distress and delay in appeal rights.

  • London Borough of Wandsworth (24 003 294)

    Statement Not upheld Looked after children 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decision not to uphold her complaints about the failure to provide her with support as a young care leaver. We did not find the Council to be at fault because it carried out a thorough, evidence-based investigation under the statutory children’s complaints procedure. The Ombudsman cannot add anything to what has already been decided during this process.

  • North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 003 435)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: We found no fault on Mr C’s complaint about the Council failing to ensure compliance with planning conditions, which included an acoustic fence, and it failing to take enforcement action for a fence attached to his garage, both of which affected his amenities. The Council properly considered whether it need to take enforcement action. It failed to follow procedure when it dealt with his formal complaint. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

  • London Borough of Enfield (24 003 954)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to provide his son, Y with a suitable education or the provision set out in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan after he stopped attending school in July 2023. The Council was at fault. It failed to provide Y with any education or the specialist provision in Y’s EHC Plan between September 2023 and June 2024. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments to acknowledge the impact this had on Y’s education.

  • London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 005 131)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 10-Jan-2025

    Summary: The Council failed to meet its duty to provide Ms X with interim, or temporary, accommodation when she told the Council she needed to flee her home due to domestic abuse. As a result, Ms X and her children remained living in the property where she reported being at risk of abuse, for fourteen months. The Council also failed to inform Ms X for almost a year that she had been added to the housing register. In recognition of the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise, make Ms X an offer of suitable accommodation, pay Ms X £3,050 and carry out service improvements.

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