Decision search
Your search has 53256 results
-
Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (24 017 161)
Statement Not upheld Antisocial behaviour 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council has not investigated his reports of Anti-Social Behaviour. He said this has impacted his mental health. The Council was not at fault.
-
Cheshire East Council (24 017 188)
Statement Upheld Child protection 08-Jul-2025
Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it responded to Mrs X’s reports of a safeguarding risk to her children. It took short-term action to reduce the risk and then carried out an assessment to put long-term support in place for Mrs X’s family. The Council failed to follow its complaint procedure, causing Mrs X uncertainty and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise and take steps to ensure it follows its complaint procedure in future.
-
Westminster City Council (24 017 730)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained that she was wrongly detained under the Mental Health Act, that the doctor involved in the assessment did not speak to her, and that information in her notes was wrong. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint as it is late, and we have seen no good reason to investigate it now.
-
Central & North West London NHS Foundation Trust (24 017 730a)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Mental health services 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained that she was wrongly detained under the Mental Health Act, that the doctor involved in the assessment did not speak to her, and that information in her notes was wrong. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint as it is late, and we have seen no good reason to investigate it now.
-
NHS North West London ICB (24 017 730b)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Mental health services 08-Jul-2025
Summary: Ms X complained that she was wrongly detained under the Mental Health Act, that the doctor involved in the assessment did not speak to her, and that information in her notes was wrong. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint as it is late, and we have seen no good reason to investigate it now.
-
London Borough of Harrow (24 022 000)
Report Upheld Other 07-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council had not taken action to ensure that he and his wife have the respite care for their child that the family is entitled to. Mr X said this caused him and his family distress, worry, uncertainty, and frustration. The Council failed to investigate the complaints under the children’s service statutory complaints procedure following our earlier recommendation, and failed to respond to us when we asked the reasons why. We therefore have concerns about the Council’s governance arrangements to administer the statutory children’s complaints procedure.
-
Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 07-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council commissioned care package her mother, Mrs Y, received after discharge from an intermediate care facility. There were faults in the information the Council provided when commissioning the care package and care workers were unable to use the equipment. There were also faults in the way the Council and the Trust responded to the complaint. The Council and Trust have agreed to apologise and makes payments to Mrs X and Mrs Y to acknowledge the distress, frustration and uncertainty they were caused by the faults with the care arrangements. The Council has already made a symbolic payment to remedy the impact of its complaint handling faults. The Trust and Council has agreed to provide evidence of the action taken to improve joint complaint handling and discharge arrangements.
-
Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust (23 013 641a)
Statement Upheld Community hospital services 07-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council commissioned care package her mother, Mrs Y, received after discharge from an intermediate care facility. There were faults in the information the Council provided when commissioning the care package and care workers were unable to use the equipment. There were also faults in the way the Council and the Trust responded to the complaint. The Council and Trust have agreed to apologise and makes payments to Mrs X and Mrs Y to acknowledge the distress, frustration and uncertainty they were caused by the faults with the care arrangements. The Council has already made a symbolic payment to remedy the impact of its complaint handling faults. The Trust and Council has agreed to provide evidence of the action taken to improve joint complaint handling and discharge arrangements.
-
Statement Upheld Residential care 07-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council commissioned care package her mother, Mrs Y, received after discharge from an intermediate care facility. There were faults in the information the Council provided when commissioning the care package and care workers were unable to use the equipment. There were also faults in the way the Council and the Trust responded to the complaint. The Council and Trust have agreed to apologise and makes payments to Mrs X and Mrs Y to acknowledge the distress, frustration and uncertainty they were caused by the faults with the care arrangements. The Council has already made a symbolic payment to remedy the impact of its complaint handling faults. The Trust and Council has agreed to provide evidence of the action taken to improve joint complaint handling and discharge arrangements.
-
Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (24 000 950)
Statement Upheld Child protection 07-Jul-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her son’s care. The Council was at fault for delaying in completing the statutory complaint procedure and failing to provide a suitable remedy for the faults identified through the statutory complaint procedure. This caused Miss X distress and frustration. The Council will apologise, make a payment and send us evidence of completed service improvements.