Herefordshire Council (25 015 267)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 10-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council during a meeting for continuing healthcare funding. The Council’s actions do not cause a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement. The funding decision is an NHS decision which we have no powers to consider.

Sheffield City Council (25 009 178)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 09-Mar-2026

Summary: Mr X and his legal representative Mr Z complained the Council wrongly decided Mr X’s mother, Mrs Y, deprived herself of assets for the purpose of reducing her care fees. The Council considered the circumstances of Mrs X’s case in line with the Care and Support Statutory Guidance without fault.

West Northamptonshire Council (25 000 612)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 09-Mar-2026

Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s decision to reduce her care and support hours. We do not find fault in the Council’s decision making.

Salford City Council (25 016 673)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 09-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council followed its assessment process when considering disabled adaptations. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Buckinghamshire Council (25 003 731)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 06-Mar-2026

Summary: A person complained on behalf of Miss X that the Council reduced her hours of care when the care company changed. We find the Council acted in line with the law and guidance when it decided Miss X’s new care package met her needs, and therefore do not find it at fault.

Manchester City Council (25 011 652)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 06-Mar-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the care and support provided to her by Manchester City Council. This is because we are satisfied the Council is taking appropriate action to deal with Miss X’s concerns and that an investigation by the Ombudsmen would be unlikely to find fault.

London Borough of Lewisham (25 003 733)

Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 05-Mar-2026

Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to ensure continuity of her care and support when she moved to another local authority area. We find no fault in the Council’s actions.

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 006 606)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 05-Mar-2026

Summary: There was fault in the way the Council considered the funding of the late Mrs X’s placement in the care home. It did not properly consider the risk to Mrs X of a move to another placement, although that had been clearly identified in its own assessment, and it failed therefore to consider its duty to fund the current care home as the only suitable placement to meet Mrs X’s needs. The Council also failed properly to respond to Mr A’s complaint. It will apologise for its shortcomings, and make an appropriate payment to her estate.

Leicestershire County Council (25 001 811)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 04-Mar-2026

Summary: There was a delay by the Council in reviewing H’s assessment after Mrs X complained, which caused her frustration and anxiety. In addition, the Council has not considered properly H’s additional expenses incurred because of his disabilities, with the result that he is unable to finance some items. The Council agrees to review his personal expenses allowance.

London Borough of Hounslow (25 008 267)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 04-Mar-2026

Summary: Ms X complains the Council has not dealt properly with services for her family including reviewing an Education Health and Care Plan, her son’s education provision, blue badge applications, a carers assessment and has not handled her complaints properly. The Council is at fault because it delayed an Education Health and Care Plan annual review, failed to make special educational provision, closed a child in need plan without informing her and did not deal with part of her complaint through the correct complaints process. Ms X suffered a delayed right of appeal and Y missed special educational needs provision. The Council should apologise, make a symbolic payment to Ms X, repay Ms X costs of therapy provision and make service improvements.