Decision search
Your search has 55054 results
-
Westminster City Council (25 000 015)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 29-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the removal of her sibling’s child from their care. The law prevents us from investigating anything that is or has been the subject of court proceedings.
-
Charnwood Borough Council (25 000 085)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 29-May-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s maintenance of a social housing property as this matter is not within our legal remit.
-
London Borough of Barnet (25 000 726)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 29-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s administration of her council tax in 2000. This is because this complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.
-
Transport for London (25 000 971)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 29-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that he was unable to pay a penalty charge using the methods set out in the notice. This is because Transport for London has agreed to accept a lesser amount and Mr X has now paid. The case is therefore closed and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X.
-
City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 001 065)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 29-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about being refused a Care Leaver Exemption for council tax. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and we could not achieve the outcome the complainant wants.
-
Hertfordshire County Council (24 005 696)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 29-May-2025
Summary: Mrs Y complained the Council failed in its duty to ensure that her son’s Education, Health and Care plan was reviewed in line with the statutory timescales. She also complains the Council did not ensure her son received the educational provision he was entitled to. Some of Mrs Y’s complaint is too old for us to consider. In the other parts of the complaint, we find fault and the Council has agreed to provide a symbolic remedy in recognition of a shortfall in D’s interim provision between May and September 2024.
-
Blackburn with Darwen Council (24 005 703)
Statement Upheld Disabled facilities grants 29-May-2025
Summary: Ms D complains about the time the Council has taken to deal with a Disabled Facilities Grant application. Ms D says the Council’s delay has impacted the whole family physically and mentally. We found the Council is at fault due to the time it has taken. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms D, make a recognition payment, provide her with a plan and timescale going forward, and make service improvements.
-
Leicestershire County Council (24 007 343)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 29-May-2025
Summary: We found the Council at fault for failing to properly consider its duty to provide alternative education for Mrs X’s child, Y, or document its decision-making. However, we cannot say the Council’s decision would have been different, but for these faults. The Council agreed to apologise and pay a symbolic financial remedy in recognition of the avoidable uncertainty this caused. It also agreed to provide guidance to its officers.
-
London Borough of Ealing (24 008 943)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 29-May-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his homelessness. The Council was at fault for delays in reaching decisions on Mr X’s application and for not offering interim accommodation. It has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X to acknowledge the extra time he spent in unsuitable accommodation. It has also agreed to provide training or guidance for staff.
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 009 141)
Statement Upheld Enforcement 29-May-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council wrongly approved a planning application for a development next to her property. There was no evidence of fault in how the Council considered the planning application. The Council delayed in dealing with Mrs X’s complaint at stage two of its complaints procedure which caused frustration to her. The Council has apologised to Mrs X for the delay which was an appropriate and proportionate remedy.