Safeguarding


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Lambeth (24 010 904)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 13-Oct-2025

    Summary: Miss X complains on behalf of Mrs Y that the Council did not deal properly with a safeguarding investigation. The Council didn’t properly communicate with Miss X about what was being investigated. Miss X suffered uncertainty and avoidable distress. The Council should apologise to Miss X and pay Miss X £200.

  • London Borough of Ealing (25 006 042)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 13-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure of the Council to assess and safeguard Mr X for several years up to 2024. Investigation would be unlikely to establish a causal link between the actions of the Council, and the injustice Mr X complains of. The Council has also already offered Mr X an assessment, and we would be unlikely to recommend more than this.

  • London Borough of Newham (25 006 239)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 13-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s choice of residential placement for Mr X or its communication with Miss Y about the matter. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • Nottinghamshire County Council (24 021 386)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 09-Oct-2025

    Summary: There was fault in the care provided to Mrs D, particularly in relation to falls prevention, record keeping and keeping Mrs D safe from other residents. This has caused an injustice and the Council has agreed to apologise, reduce the invoice and carry out a service improvement.

  • Essex County Council (25 006 439)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 09-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to act on safeguarding concerns about Miss X’s late grandmother. The Council has already acknowledged it missed opportunities to escalate those concerns and committed to improving its safeguarding strategies. Further investigation is unlikely to achieve anything more.

  • Royal Borough of Greenwich (25 002 977)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 08-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council followed its safeguarding procedures. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

  • North Northamptonshire Council (25 003 459)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 08-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his safeguarding concerns about his brother. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

  • South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 007 109)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 07-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council social worker told a family member that he had provided information to the Council about the family member’s personal circumstances without their consent. This is because the Council has already apologised to Mr X and arranged training for the staff member involved. We consider this to be a sufficient remedy to this complaint.

  • West Northamptonshire Council (25 005 910)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 04-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the conduct of the Council’s social workers in 2023. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (25 005 569)

    Statement Upheld Safeguarding 01-Oct-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about failures in adult social care process to appoint a representative. The Council apologised for the impact of its fault and redid the process. We are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken and it is unlikely we would add anything further or reach a different outcome.

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