Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (18 019 798)

    Statement Not upheld Other 11-May-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complains that the Council failed to provide support for her adult son, Mr S, in 2018, and that the Council failed on its promises of work experience and a job for Mr S. Mrs X says the Council's failings have caused her son to become depressed and housebound. The Ombudsman does not find the Council at fault.

  • Herefordshire Council (19 019 453)

    Statement Upheld Other 04-May-2021

    Summary: Mr C complained about the actions of his daughter's care support provider, which was commissioned by the Council. We found that Ms C received incorrect invoices and her care support workers failed to pick up some issues with the way Ms D managed her money. However, there was no fault in the way the Council tried to support Ms D with engaging in more meaningful activities. The Council had already adjusted the invoices and has agreed to apologise for any distress Mr C and Ms D experienced.

  • Kent County Council (20 004 752)

    Statement Upheld Other 22-Apr-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council's decision to de-register him as a Shared Lives host. Mr X said the panel process which led to his de-registration was unfair and flawed. The Council was at fault. It failed to administer the panel and appeal process in line with relevant policy and the Ombudsman's Principles of Good Administrative Practice. It caused Mr X uncertainty about whether the outcome could have been different. The Council agreed to review and ask a fresh panel to consider Mr X's case.

  • Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (20 004 885)

    Statement Not upheld Other 20-Apr-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to notify him and his brother Mr Y of their brother's death. The Council is not at fault.

  • Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (20 003 378)

    Statement Upheld Other 14-Apr-2021

    Summary: Miss X complains that the Council failed to accept responsibility for her aunt and cousin and consequently failed to meet their housing and care support needs. The Council has acknowledged its actions caused unnecessary delays and upset to Miss X and her family. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a financial payment and service improvements.

  • Hales Group Ltd (19 012 144)

    Statement Upheld Other 13-Apr-2021

    Summary: The care provider did not act promptly to report safeguarding concerns about Mr X. It failed to treat Mr X with dignity. The care provider will now take steps to review its procedures and offer a sum in recognition of the injustice suffered.

  • Wiltshire Council (20 005 582)

    Statement Upheld Other 13-Apr-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council's commissioned provider failed to give him respite support on two occasions and it failed to pay the self-employed carer he engaged as replacement cover. The Council was at fault for its failure to provide Mr X with respite support. As a result, Mr X paid privately for the replacement carer. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

  • London Borough of Lewisham (20 006 910)

    Statement Upheld Other 13-Apr-2021

    Summary: The Ombudsmen investigated and upheld an earlier complaint about charging for accommodation which should have been free under section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983. We have now investigated a complaint about the Council, NHS Trust and NHS Clinical Commissioning Group failing to carry out actions agreed during the earlier investigation. We have upheld the complaint. We have also found that an estimated 57 other patients may not have up-to-date section 117 aftercare plans. The organisations accept our recommendations, so we have completed our investigation.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (19 021 184)

    Statement Upheld Other 13-Apr-2021

    Summary: There was fault by the Council. A letter contained inaccurate information about the education provision in Mr Y's Education, Health and Care Plan. The Council will apologise for the avoidable confusion to his mother, Mrs X.

  • London Borough of Hounslow (20 003 892)

    Statement Not upheld Other 07-Apr-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the actions the Council took to identify long-term living arrangements for her brother, Mr Z, and the way it applied to the Court of Protection for deputyship for Mr Z. She also complained about the actions of social workers who she said were biased and hid information. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

Privacy settings

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.