Decision search
Your search has 51938 results
-
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 15-May-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide an education for her son, Y, for two and half years, delayed issuing an Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and then issued it without all the relevant information and named a school Y would not attend. Mrs X also complained the Council delayed taking action after it completed mediation about the EHC Plan. The Council was at fault for delaying to issue Y’s EHC Plan, delaying taking action following mediation and failing to maintain oversight of alternative provision Y was receiving. This caused Mrs X avoidable frustration and uncertainty. The Council will apologise, make a symbolic payment and take action to improve its service.
-
London Borough of Waltham Forest (24 009 945)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 15-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure his son, Y received an education or the specialist provision in his Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan since October 2023 while he was out of school. The Council was at fault as it failed to ensure Y received a suitable education in line with his EHC Plan between October 2023 and July 2024. The Council agreed to make payments to recognise the impact this had on Y’s education and for the distress and uncertainty caused to Mr X.
-
Cumberland Council (24 010 125)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 15-May-2025
Summary: There was delay by the Council in assessing Mr X’s child’s special educational needs and issuing a final Educational, Health and Care Plan that provided additional support. There was also fault in failing to consider if the Council’s duty under s.19 Education Act to provide full-time education was triggered, or to keep a part-time timetable under review. As a result, Mr X’s child did not receive alternative education on par with what they could expect to receive in school. There was also service failure in the transfer of records. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and make service improvements.
-
Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 010 407)
Statement Upheld Noise 15-May-2025
Summary: Ms G complained about the way the Council’s Environmental Health Service dealt with her complaint about a noise nuisance from a neighbour’s dog. We find the Council’s investigation was adequate, but find some fault around its communications with Ms G. This will have caused Ms G some frustration. The Council has made an offer of a symbolic payment as a remedy, which is suitable.
-
Nottinghamshire County Council (24 010 840)
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 15-May-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s role in supporting her late mother Mrs Y to move from a care home to live with her in another council’s area. The Council was at fault for poor communication and delay. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X to acknowledge the frustration and distress she was caused and pay some of the care fees for the extra weeks Mrs Y remained in the care home due to the Council’s delays and poor communication.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 011 010)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 15-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that he remained living in unsuitable temporary accommodation for over 12 months, despite the Council agreeing to move him. He also complained about delay in the Council’s complaints process. We upheld both parts of the complaint, finding the Council at fault for not re-housing Mr X sooner and for delay in responding to his complaint. These faults caused distress to Mr X and meant he lived in unsuitable accommodation for far longer than he should have. The Council has accepted these findings. At the end of this statement, I set out action the Council has agreed to remedy this injustice caused to Mr X and improve its service.
-
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (24 011 178)
Statement Upheld Allocations 15-May-2025
Summary: Ms C complained that the Council failed to properly consider her medical conditions in refusing her request to bid on bungalows or houses. We found that the Council had not properly considered Ms C’s mental health condition or explained its reasons for discounting the medical evidence provided by her doctors. The Council has agreed to reconsider these points in a further review of her medical needs.
-
Oxfordshire County Council (24 011 571)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 15-May-2025
Summary: Ms O complained on behalf of Ms X that the Council delayed issuing an education, health and care plan, and failed to provide Ms X’s child with suitable full-time education. Ms O said this caused Ms X distress, it took time, had a financial impact, and meant her child missed out on education. We find the Council at fault for delays issuing the plan which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to make a payment to remedy this injustice.
-
Worcestershire County Council (24 011 770)
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 15-May-2025
Summary: Mr Y complained the Council failed to ensure Mr X’s care provider assigned regular drivers for his mobility car, delayed providing Mr X with medication, failed to ensure Mr X received appropriate personal care, delayed arranging a repair of Mr X’s toilet, allowed the care provider to slander him and delayed considering his complaint. There is some evidence Mr X missed out on access to the community, of missed medication, of inadequate records of bathing and of delay responding to the complaint. An apology, payment to Mr X and Mr Y, alongside procedural remedies, is satisfactory remedy.
-
North Yorkshire Council (24 012 719)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 15-May-2025
Summary: We found fault by the Council on Mrs Y’s complaint about its failings when dealing with her request for her son, Z, to have an Education, Health and Care plan. It failed to follow statutory timescales for issuing draft and final plans, failed to do what it agreed at mediation, and failed to issue Amendment Notices on time. There was little communication with her after mediation and it failed to follow its own complaints procedure. The faults caused lost provision as well as distress to Mrs Y. The Council agreed to send her an apology, pay £1,000 for missed provision, £500 for her distress, review procedures, and send relevant staff a reminder about correspondence.