Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Kent County Council (17 000 914)

    Statement Not upheld Other 10-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Council is not at fault in the way it dealt with Mrs Y's stay in a care home and carried out Deprivation of Liberty safeguarding (DoLs) assessments on her.

  • The Recovery Hub Ipswich (17 011 376)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 10-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mrs X's complaint because Recovery Hub is not an adult social care provider.

  • London Borough of Ealing (17 010 442)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 06-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr A's complaint that he should have been discharged from hospital with section 117 aftercare. This is because the Council has not had any involvement with Mr A's care or discharge from hospital so his complaint is not a matter the Ombudsman can investigate.

  • Shropshire Council (17 011 135)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 02-Nov-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B's complaint that her sister's former social worker supported a decision that her sister should not receive NHS continuing healthcare funding. An investigation by the Ombudsman of the social worker's actions would not go to the key point at issue.

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council (17 008 081)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 26-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council's decision to refer a dispute to the Court of Protection. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add to the Council's previous investigation or lead to a different outcome.

  • Lancashire County Council (17 009 358)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council's reablement service. This is because we are unlikely to achieve anything satisfactory to add to the Council's previous investigation or lead to a different outcome.

  • East Riding of Yorkshire Council (17 009 211)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 25-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a decision not to provide a stair lift. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (17 008 461)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 23-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the complainant being investigated by the Council and the police. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

  • St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (17 009 093)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 16-Oct-2017

    Summary: the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way in which the Council has communicated with the complainant regarding her brother. This is because we could not add anything further to the Council's previous investigation. We will not investigate a complaint on behalf of her brother as there is no consent for us to do so.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (16 008 178)

    Statement Upheld Other 13-Oct-2017

    Summary: The Council was at fault in how it arranged to fit a stair lift in Mr C's home. It removed a handrail without fitting the stair lift, and Mr C fell on the stairs shortly afterwards. Mr C subsequently died in hospital, so the Council cannot remedy his injustice. However, it has agreed to pay his son, Mr B, £500 to recognise the avoidable distress caused.

;