Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Kent County Council (18 019 110)

    Statement Not upheld Other 15-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's decision not to share information about his partner's whereabouts with him. The Ombudsman has discontinued his investigation. This is because Mr X is not a suitable representative to bring the complaint.

  • Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (18 017 631)

    Statement Upheld Other 10-Jul-2019

    Summary: Ms X complains the Council has failed to make reasonable adjustments in its communications with her and provided a poor level of service, causing distress. The Ombudsman finds the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments in its communications with Ms X. The Ombudsman recommends the Council provides an apology, makes a payment and takes action.

  • Sunderland City Council (17 017 396)

    Statement Not upheld Other 02-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B complain about the care and support provided to Mrs B's adult daughter at the supported living flat where she lives. Because of current court action which could consider the same matters that are the subject of this complaint the investigation has been discontinued.

  • Kent County Council (18 014 623)

    Statement Upheld Other 01-Jul-2019

    Summary: Mr D complains that the Council refused his application for crisis funding because he did not submit the evidence it requested within 24 hours. The Ombudsman finds the Council was at fault because, although it extended the deadline for submitting the evidence, it failed to inform Mr D it had done so. However, this fault did not cause Mr D a significant injustice because the Council later reviewed all the evidence he provided and made a fresh decision. The Ombudsman cannot interfere with that decision because it was properly made.

  • Norfolk County Council (18 014 522)

    Statement Upheld Other 26-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council's response to an email he sent in August 2018. He does not think it should have dealt with it as a complaint and says the refusal to answer some questions is unreasonable. The Ombudsman finds there was fault by the Council in how it handled an email from Mr X listing questions he wanted answering. Although treating it as a complaint was acceptable, it took too long to respond and misapplied its own rule about complaints on matters over 12 months old. This was fault and it caused Mr X an injustice in the form of frustration. The Council has agreed to remedy this by apologising and revisiting its complaint response.

  • Cornwall Council (18 013 351)

    Statement Upheld Other 26-Jun-2019

    Summary: Ms B runs a care home and says the Council has not fulfilled its duties towards one of the residents, Ms C which meant the care home was not paid. The Ombudsman has found fault in the Council's delay and failure to carry out the necessary assessments of Ms C. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms B, carry out a financial assessment of Ms C and, depending on the outcome of the assessment, pay the care home any fees it owes.

  • Surrey County Council (18 002 508)

    Statement Not upheld Other 26-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr B is autistic and has support needs. He complains about how the Council moved him from supported living accommodation to his own flat and says this does not meet his needs. He says he is isolated, and his support has been cut which is making his depression worse. There was no fault by the Council. The landlord asked Mr B to move. The Council has ensured his needs are met.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (19 000 135)

    Statement Upheld Other 19-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr C complains that the Council delayed in informing him that his mother's care home placement had been made permanent. The Council has accepted fault and agreed to a further financial remedy. The Ombudsman has discontinued his investigation on this basis.

  • London Borough of Camden (18 019 682)

    Statement Upheld Other 19-Jun-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsmen will not investigate Miss T's complaint about the Council's decision not to investigate her complaint about entitlement to aftercare under s117 of the Mental Health Act 1983. This is because the Council has now agreed to investigate Miss T's complaint. This remedies the injustice caused to Miss T by the Council's decision not to investigate these matters.

  • Worcestershire County Council (18 002 336)

    Statement Upheld Other 18-Jun-2019

    Summary: Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust's community mental health team took too long to rearrange a cancelled appointment. Also, it did not return Mrs A's call after she raised concerns about her son's mental health. This caused Mrs A distress. The Ombudsmen consider Worcestershire County Council and the community mental health team's lack of communication after April 2015 was fault. However, there was no impact on Mr B.