Kent County Council (25 005 438)

Statement Upheld Assessment and care plan 10-Feb-2026

Summary: Mrs B complained about the Council’s failure to approve 2:1 support for her son Mr C at one of his placements for over a year. We found fault in the actions of the Council which caused Mrs B frustration and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs B and increase the symbolic payment to her to £500.

City of Wolverhampton Council (25 007 939)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 10-Feb-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about an allegation of discrimination and safeguarding issues in the Council’s handling of Miss X’s Disabled Facilities Grant application. This is because Miss X has commenced court proceedings. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate.

Hampshire County Council (25 008 975)

Statement Upheld Charging 10-Feb-2026

Summary: Mr X complained about repeated failures of Hampshire County Council and NHS Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board to work together. He complained this caused: a prolonged delay in discharging his wife from hospital; and, his wife to be left without funding for necessary night-time care. We found fault with the Council and the ICB for failing to manage a funding dispute adequately. This caused an avoidable delay in Mrs X’s discharge from hospital which, in turn, caused avoidable stress and frustration. We have not found fault in the way each organisation considered Mrs X’s night‑time needs against relevant eligibility criteria. The Council and the ICB have agreed to take actions to address the injustice their fault caused.

Norfolk County Council (25 010 912)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled facilities grants 10-Feb-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s role in the maintenance of a faulty bath-lift that caused the complainant to have an accident in June 2023. The complaint is late.

Birmingham City Council (25 012 770)

Statement Upheld Direct payments 10-Feb-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions relating to X’s request for direct payments for care and support and its poor communication. The Council has upheld the complaint and provided an adequate remedy for X’s injustice. There are no wider public interest issues to justify our investigation.

Kent County Council (25 012 779)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 10-Feb-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult safeguarding. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council decided what was proportionate action in the circumstances. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would add to the Council’s investigation or lead to a different outcome.

North Northamptonshire Council (25 012 914)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 10-Feb-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about adult safeguarding. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council decided what was proportionate action in the circumstances. It is unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would add to the Council’s investigation or lead to a different outcome.

Birmingham City Council (24 016 538)

Statement Upheld Transition from childrens services 09-Feb-2026

Summary: Mr Y complains about the Council’s poor handling of his child’s transition from Children’s Services to Adult Social Care. Mr Y also complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint. The Council has now upheld all aspects of Mr Y’s complaint and there is no further fault for us to find. Our investigation has therefore focussed on the Council’s remedy. We find the remedy already provided to be proportionate and ask the Council to send evidence that the agreed outcomes have been completed.

The Orders Of St. John Care Trust (25 000 898)

Statement Not upheld Residential care 09-Feb-2026

Summary: Mrs X complained about the quality of care provided to her mother, Ms Y, by The Orders of St John Care Trust when she resided in Goodson Lodge Care Centre. We found the Care Provider’s actions did not cause injustice to Ms Y.

London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (25 005 077)

Statement Upheld Other 09-Feb-2026

Summary: We find fault by West London NHS Trust and London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham in terms of their delivery of aftercare services to which Mr X was entitled under section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983. This fault caused Mr X uncertainty and distress. The Trust and Council will apologise to Mr X and the Trust will pay him a financial remedy. The Trust and Council will also ensure Mr X has an appropriate section 117 aftercare plan in place and an allocated care coordinator.