Decision search
Your search has 51938 results
-
Uttlesford District Council (25 001 633)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 18-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
-
London Borough of Islington (25 001 641)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Leisure and culture 18-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision on library stock. This is because Ms X’s complaint is late and there are no good reasons why it could not have been made to us sooner.
-
Kent County Council (25 002 299)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 18-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.
-
Wiltshire Council (24 021 168)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 18-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mrs X’s needs not being met as a carer. This is because the Council have already agreed to a reassessment so an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
-
Brighton & Hove City Council (25 000 563)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 17-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a data breach as this is a matter for the Information Commissioner's Office. The complainant’s allegation of misconduct in a public office is a matter for the police.
-
Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 022 094)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School exclusions 16-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s daughter’s permanent exclusion from a school and her subsequent placement at a Pupil Referral Unit. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.
-
Kent County Council (24 021 285)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School transport 16-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse the complainant’s application and appeal for school transport for her daughter. There is insufficient evidence of fault on the Council’s part to warrant investigation.
-
Buckinghamshire Council (24 008 864)
Statement Upheld Charging 15-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council charged the late Mrs Y for respite care after telling the family it would be free. He also complained Mrs Y spent longer than planned in respite care due to the Council’s poor communication and management of the case. This caused the family distress. We found the Council at fault for failing to provide clear and timely information about charges for Mrs Y’s respite care. But we did not find the Council at fault over the time Mrs Y spent in respite. The Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment for the distress caused.
-
London Borough of Islington (24 009 098)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 15-May-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to prepare to transition her son, Mr Y, to adulthood, caused distress to him, and caused delays in assessing him for a care plan. There was fault by the Council. It delayed completing Mr Y’s care assessment and did not consider taking a different approach in completing the assessment when it considered Mr Y was not engaging with it. It also did not keep Mr Y and Ms X informed throughout the process, and wrongly closed Mr Y’s referral to mental health services. Because of the fault, Mr Y and Ms X suffered distress and uncertainty, and there was a delay in Mr Y receiving mental health support. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr Y and Ms X, make a symbolic payment to Mr Y, and issue staff briefings.
-
London Borough of Lambeth (24 009 810)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 15-May-2025
Summary: Miss X complains the Council did not deal properly with her homelessness. The Council placed her in unsuitable accommodation, failed to complete a suitability review and placed her in the wrong housing band. Miss X suffered delay, avoidable distress and had to live in unsuitable housing. The Council should apologise and pay Miss X £6,600.