Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 52967 results

  • Leicester City Council (24 017 002)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council taking too long to put up a replacement fence at a property it owns. This is because we cannot investigate complaints about the management of social housing by a council in its role as a social landlord.

  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 062)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Building control 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed signing off work to a property. This is because the Council has now signed off the work and therefore investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • Transport for London (24 015 208)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr to X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to make a late witness statement/ statutory declaration.

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (23 004 611)

    Statement Upheld Other 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the failure of a Council, an ICB and a care provider to keep her daughter safe in a shared living placement. We found fault by the Council and the ICB for not doing enough to address the situation in a clear, measured and timely way. The situation caused Mrs X and her daughter avoidable stress and upset. We recommended the Council and the ICB apologise, make symbolic payments and improve their services.

  • Voyage Care (23 004 611a)

    Statement Not upheld Care and treatment 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the failure of a Council, an ICB and a care provider to keep her daughter safe in a shared living placement. We found fault by the Council and the ICB for not doing enough to address the situation in a clear, measured and timely way. The situation caused Mrs X and her daughter avoidable stress and upset. We recommended the Council and the ICB apologise, make symbolic payments and improve their services.

  • Voyage Care (23 004 611b)

    Statement Not upheld Care and treatment 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the failure of a Council, an ICB and a care provider to keep her daughter safe in a shared living placement. We found fault by the Council and the ICB for not doing enough to address the situation in a clear, measured and timely way. The situation caused Mrs X and her daughter avoidable stress and upset. We recommended the Council and the ICB apologise, make symbolic payments and improve their services.

  • NHS West Yorkshire ICB - Calderdale (23 004 611c)

    Statement Upheld Care and treatment 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the failure of a Council, an ICB and a care provider to keep her daughter safe in a shared living placement. We found fault by the Council and the ICB for not doing enough to address the situation in a clear, measured and timely way. The situation caused Mrs X and her daughter avoidable stress and upset. We recommended the Council and the ICB apologise, make symbolic payments and improve their services.

  • NHS West Yorkshire ICB - Calderdale (23 004 611d)

    Statement Upheld Care and treatment 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the failure of a Council, an ICB and a care provider to keep her daughter safe in a shared living placement. We found fault by the Council and the ICB for not doing enough to address the situation in a clear, measured and timely way. The situation caused Mrs X and her daughter avoidable stress and upset. We recommended the Council and the ICB apologise, make symbolic payments and improve their services.

  • Cheshire East Council (23 016 791)

    Statement Upheld Charging 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Ms X complained about how the Council decided to meet Mrs Y’s care and support needs and how it assessed her finances. Ms X said this caused her real stress and frustration. We do not find the Council at fault. We are satisfied the Council has already apologised where there was evidence of fault or delay with the Council’s communication with Ms X.

  • London Borough of Croydon (23 018 175)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 08-Jan-2025

    Summary: Mrs X complained on behalf of Mr Y that the Council failed to ensure a new housing development complied with the planning conditions set out in the approved plans. As a result, she says neighbours could see into Mr Y’s property. The lack of privacy caused Mr Y distress, frustration and uncertainty. Mrs X also complained the Council failed to adequately investigate and respond to her complaints. The Council was at fault for failing to ensure the developer had adhered to the planning conditions and for its delayed complaint responses. The Council has already taken action to ensure the planning condition has been met. However, it has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mr Y remedy the injustice caused.

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