Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (24 014 867)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 29-Jul-2025

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s assessments of his daughter’s care needs, its delays, and not properly considering her needs for additional support. We found the Council at fault for the time taken to complete the assessments and its contact with Mr X about proposed changes to a care plan. This caused significant frustration, uncertainty and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

London Borough of Harrow (24 016 628)

Statement Not upheld Transport 29-Jul-2025

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council and its contracted third-party company considered his application for a blue disabled parking badge. We have not found fault with how the Council and the company working on its behalf assessed and decided upon his application.

North Northamptonshire Council (24 017 239)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 29-Jul-2025

Summary: On behalf of Mr B, Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of a safeguarding incident and subsequent investigations. We find the Council at fault for a delay in completing the safeguarding enquiry and poor communication during the process. This caused Mr X frustration, uncertainty and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic financial payment and complete service improvements to remedy the injustice caused.

Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (23 008 507)

Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 29-Jul-2025

Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with her request for adaptations and housing to meet the needs of her disabled child. The Council took too long to consider the recommendations and it did not deal with her complaints and review requests properly. It did not properly consider its discretion to admit her to its housing register. The Council’s shortcomings caused Miss X distress and uncertainty, but it is unlikely her family would have been rehoused sooner, or that the Council would have made the adaptations she requested. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X, make symbolic payments, backdate her housing priority, and share this decision with relevant staff.

Peterborough City Council (25 000 061)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 29-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a nursing assessment completed for his son. He says the assessment was not completed appropriately and the nurse provided unhelpful information. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault. In addition, the alleged fault did not cause any significant injustice.

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (25 000 429)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 29-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to fund travel costs to a day centre he chooses to attend outside of its area. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Dorset Council (25 001 341)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Charging 29-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that her mother Mrs Y’s financial gifts to family members were deprivations of her assets required for care home fees. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision‑making process to warrant us investigating.

Essex County Council (25 006 558)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Transport 29-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered a Blue Badge application. This is because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable.

London Borough of Redbridge (25 007 484)

Statement Upheld Safeguarding 29-Jul-2025

Summary: The Council failed to properly assess the capacity of three family members to make a homelessness application when they told the Council they were suffering domestic abuse. The Council did not deal with the safeguarding referral appropriately or in good time, and did not offer the family social care needs assessments soon enough. It cannot show how it made the decision to offer a one-bedroom property and it took too long to deal with the complaint to it. The family missed out on interim accommodation, and they were caused distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make symbolic payments to the family, and review their housing needs. It will also review its training and procedures on mental capacity assessment, arranging interpreters, and monitoring case progress.

Greensleeves Homes Trust (25 003 362)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 29-Jul-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about missing items in a care home. The substantive matter is best considered by the small claims court, and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaint-handling in isolation.