Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Suffolk County Council (25 011 184)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Dec-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision it was no longer responsible for the complainant’s aftercare needs after she moved out of its area and was sectioned in a different council’s area. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (25 016 340)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 15-Dec-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Council officer’s conduct while he was talking to a different officer. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate now.

  • Bupa Care Homes (PT Lindsay) Limited (25 010 940)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 12-Dec-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Care Home losing her late relative, Ms Y’s rings. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome she wants, we would not be able to add to the Care Provider’s investigation and it would be reasonable for Mrs X to use the legal route which is available to her.

  • Gloucestershire County Council (25 010 866)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 10-Dec-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this whistle-blowing complaint about matters principally involving staff safety at temporary accommodation contracted by the Council. We are not a responsible body for whistle-blowing complaints and other bodies are better placed than us to deal with this matter.

  • Lincolnshire County Council (24 017 267)

    Statement Not upheld Other 08-Dec-2025

    Summary: Ms A complained a local authority and NHS organisations failed to provide her with the care she needs over several years. She also complains they failed to adequately adapt the way it assessed her needs. We have not found fault. There is evidence the organisations have tried to adapt to meet Ms A’s needs and have offered a range of services to support her.

  • Suffolk County Council (25 004 677)

    Statement Not upheld Other 03-Dec-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council continues to manage her money even though she has now paid off her debts. We have ended our investigation into this complaint because the Council has explained why it remains her appointee, there is no evidence of fault in its actions or of significant injustice to Miss X, and we cannot achieve the outcome she wants.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (25 006 614)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 28-Nov-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the actions of a social worker. That is because the matters he complaints about have been subject to court proceedings.

  • Liberty House Clinic Limited (25 010 112)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 28-Nov-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Care Provider’s decision not to issue a full refund after it decided his son, Mr Y, needed to be discharged immediately, within 24 hours of admission for treatment. The complaint lies outside our jurisdiction because it is not made about actions that involve, or are connected to, the provision of adult social care. We have no discretion to consider it.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (25 001 165)

    Statement Upheld Other 27-Nov-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult social care because it is unlikely we would add to the care provider’s investigation or reach a different outcome. The care provider accepted fault, apologised for the distress caused, and acted to improve future service. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider concerns about breach of personal data.

  • Leicester City Council (24 023 320)

    Statement Not upheld Other 25-Nov-2025

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council when it asked Mr X to pay his care home charges and when it found he was not eligible for funding under the Mental Health Act. The Council set out the care charges when he moved to the care home and how these may be deferred. The Council also held recovery of the charges while Mr X’s son challenged the outstanding amount.

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.

Privacy settings