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

  • Isle of Wight Council (24 008 487)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council handled his son, A’s, Education and Health Care needs assessment following an Order the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Tribunal made in May 2024. We found the Council was at fault for the delay in finalising A’s needs assessment. The Council agreed to pay Mr X £300 to recognise the uncertainty the delay caused him.

  • London Borough of Bexley (24 009 345)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. She says the Council wrongly advised her to stay in the property even after the expiry of a valid eviction notice. She also says the Council failed to offer her temporary accommodation promptly which led to her getting into rent arrears after her landlord raised the rent and made the property unaffordable. We found the Council was at fault for not offering interim accommodation when Ms S became homeless. The Council agreed to apologise, pay her legal costs and pay her a remedy for the stress she experienced.

  • London Borough of Southwark (24 014 256)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her housing case, the actions of an occupational therapist, and that her representative was excluded from meetings and being involved. This is because the accepted fault did not cause any significant injustice. In addition, there is insufficient evidence of fault, and an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (24 014 867)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s assessments of his daughter’s care needs, its delays, and not properly considering her needs for additional support. We found the Council at fault for the time taken to complete the assessments and its contact with Mr X about proposed changes to a care plan. This caused significant frustration, uncertainty and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

  • London Borough of Camden (24 015 788)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: Mr D complained the Council left him in unsuitable temporary accommodation. I have found fault by the Council, it has agreed to pay Mr D £450 for the three months delay moving him to suitable temporary accommodation.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (22 013 855)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B complained the Council failed to ensure their son received the provision in his education, health and care plan, failed to put in place education when their son stopped attending school and delayed responding to their complaint. There is evidence Mr and Mrs B’s son did not receive all the one-to-one provision in his education, health and care plan, the Council failed to act appropriately when Mr and Mrs B’s son stopped attending school and the Council delayed responding to the complaint. That means Mr and Mrs B’s son missed out on education and special educational needs provision. An apology, payment to Mr and Mrs B and reminder to officers is satisfactory remedy.

  • Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (23 008 507)

    Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her request for adaptations and housing to meet the needs of her disabled child. The Council took too long to consider the recommendations and it did not deal with her complaints and review requests properly. It did not properly consider its discretion to admit her to its housing register. The Council’s shortcomings caused Miss X distress and uncertainty, but it is unlikely her family would have been rehoused sooner, or that the Council would have made the adaptations she requested. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X, make symbolic payments, backdate her housing priority, and share this decision with relevant staff.

  • London Borough of Islington (25 002 369)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing penalty charge notices (PCNs) to the holder of a blue disability badge. It was reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the London Tribunals about the issuing of the PCNs. Mr X also complained about the Council’s failure to consider the provisions of the Equality Act 2010. There is not enough evidence the Council failed to consider his requirements under the Public Sector Equality Duty and only the courts can determine if the provisions of the Act were breached.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (24 008 348)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 29-Jul-2025

    Summary: The Council failed to properly assess the capacity of three family members to make a homelessness application when they told the Council they were suffering domestic abuse. The Council did not deal with the safeguarding referral appropriately or in good time, and did not offer the family social care needs assessments soon enough. It cannot show how it made the decision to offer a one-bedroom property and it took too long to deal with the complaint to it. The family missed out on interim accommodation, and they were caused distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make symbolic payments to the family, and review their housing needs. It will also review its training and procedures on mental capacity assessment, arranging interpreters, and monitoring case progress.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (24 016 820)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 28-Jul-2025

    Summary: The Council was at fault for poor communication and delays in Mr X’s homeless application. Mr X experienced avoidable distress and financial loss as a result. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Mr X.

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