Adult care services


Recent reports in this category are shown below:

  • Shropshire Council (24 009 874)

    Statement Upheld Transition from childrens services 03-Jun-2025

    Summary: The Council delayed making a decision about Mr Y’s social care provision and issuing the decision to cease to maintain his Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused avoidable uncertainty, distress and a delay in appeal rights which have not been used. The Council has already apologised and this is an appropriate remedy.

  • London Borough of Ealing (24 016 130)

    Statement Upheld Charging 03-Jun-2025

    Summary: We have upheld Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of the charges for his adult social care. The Council has agreed to take appropriate steps to remedy the uncertainty caused.

  • Hampshire County Council (24 021 538)

    Statement Upheld Charging 03-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X complaint about the Council’s handling of his late father’s residential care charges. The Council has accepted it was at fault for not completing financial assessments sooner. It has apologised and offered a significant reduction in the outstanding invoice for care charges. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.

  • East Sussex County Council (25 000 283)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 03-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a Blue Badge because there is not enough evidence of fault.

  • East Sussex County Council (24 022 456)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 03-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of charging issues for a resident at her care home up to 2022. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider it now.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (24 012 786)

    Statement Upheld Other 02-Jun-2025

    Summary: LGSCO finds the Council was at fault for failing to consider Ms X’s needs arising from her disability when replacing her shower. The Housing Ombudsman finds maladministration in the Council’s handling of Ms X’s reports of repairs. Both Ombudsmen find fault in the Council’s complaint handling. To remedy the injustice to Ms X, the Council has agreed to apologise, replace Ms X’s shower, make payments and act to improve its service.

  • Oakland Care (24 013 160)

    Statement Not upheld Residential care 02-Jun-2025

    Summary: Mr Z, on behalf of his father Mr X, complained that the quality of care at Woodland Grove Care Home, Loughton fell below acceptable standards and that there was a lack of communication. There is no evidence of fault in how the care provider dealt with end of life issues, falls and hydration for Mr X.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (24 012 196)

    Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 01-Jun-2025

    Summary: The Council overcharged Mrs Y for the care and support it provided to meet her needs and failed to explain how the charges were calculated. It also delayed responding to the complaint Mr X made on her behalf and the complaint response was inadequate. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and Mrs Y and make a payment to acknowledge the uncertainty and frustration they were caused. It has also agreed to revise the invoices and provide training or guidance to staff about responding appropriately to complaints.

  • Kent County Council (24 009 455)

    Statement Upheld Charging 01-Jun-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained about an invoice which incorrectly backdated charges for his stepfather’s stay at a care home and delay in the Council’s complaint process. We have found delay and poor communication causing distress but consider the Council’s proposed action of an apology, symbolic payment and liaison with the care home to obtain a refund of fees provides a suitable remedy.

  • Bristol City Council (24 017 947)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 01-Jun-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care assessment process. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision-making process or reach a different outcome.

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