Decision search
Your search has 52042 results
-
Central Bedfordshire Council (23 021 044)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide a suitable education for her child when they were unable to attend school due to bullying. Mrs X also said the Council incorrectly decided not to consider a complaint about this. We have found the Council at fault for failing to consider Mrs X’s complaint through its complaints procedure. We have also found the Council at fault for failing to properly consider its section 19 duty, or document its decision-making. We cannot say the Council’s response would have been different, but for these faults. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic financial remedy in recognition of the avoidable uncertainty caused. The Council also agreed to provide guidance to its officers.
-
Nottingham City Council (24 001 921)
Statement Not upheld Other 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to act over the condition of two derelict properties near her home. She said the condition of the properties encourages fly-tipping and rodents, which is a public health issue impacting her, and the community. There was no fault in the Council’s consideration of its available powers or in its response to the issues Ms X complained about.
-
Milton Keynes Council (24 002 516)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the way the Council dealt with her son, Y’s education. The Council was at fault for failing to issue the Education Health and Care Plan within statutory timeframes and poor communication and complaint handling. This caused distress and frustration to Miss X and Y. The Council will apologise and make a payment to recognise the personal injustice caused.
-
Devon County Council (24 011 848)
Statement Upheld Transition from childrens services 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed assessing her son’s adult care needs on his transition from children to adult care services. We find the Council was at fault as it significantly delayed completing an assessment of Mrs X’s son’s adult care needs. This caused avoidable distress and frustration, and Mrs X had to privately fund provision for her son. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to apologise to Mrs X and her son, make payments to them and implement service improvements.
-
Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 009 106)
Statement Upheld Other 25-Mar-2025
Summary: We have upheld this complaint the Council has delayed in resolving a disagreement about accommodation costs. The Council has agreed to make a decision about the disputed costs within the next four weeks. That is proportionate to remedy the injustice caused.
-
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed issuing J’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan. Ms X also complained the Council communicated poorly and failed to properly address her complaint. We have found the Council at fault for its delay in issuing J’s EHC Plan, partly arising from service failure. We have also found the Council at fault for its poor communication. We do not consider the delay led to J missing special educational provision, for the reasons set out in the statement. However, the Council’s faults caused avoidable distress and uncertainty for Ms X and J, which the Council did not adequately recognise. The Council has agreed to apologise for this. The Council is already implementing service improvements to address the underlying faults that occurred in this case. The Ombudsman will continue to monitor these improvements through our casework.
-
London Borough of Sutton (24 010 326)
Statement Not upheld Other 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs B complained that the Council had not dealt with planning enforcement and noise issues properly when a nearby business increased its use of land near her home for storage and deliveries. There was no fault by the Council. It investigated the concerns raised properly and considered the evidence before deciding it could not take enforcement action.
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 010 656)
Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs X complains about the safeguarding investigation relating to her daughter, Miss Y. She says Miss Y was not properly involved in the process, and the Section 42 enquiries did not lead to any accountability about what happened to Miss Y. Mrs X says the matter has caused significant distress to both her and Miss Y. We have found no fault in the actions of the Council.
-
Coventry City Council (24 010 975)
Statement Not upheld School admissions 25-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that the appeals panel failed to properly consider her school admissions appeal. We have not found the Council at fault.
-
London Borough of Merton (24 010 994)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 25-Mar-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to reports of noise nuisance. This is because any investigation by us is unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.