Decision search
Your search has 50055 results
-
Surrey County Council (24 000 874)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 06-Nov-2024
Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed completing an Education, Health and Care needs assessment for her child and delayed putting in place educational provision after her child could not attend school. This meant her child missed education they should have received and has fallen behind their peers. We have found the Council at fault, however we are satisfied the Council has already offered Ms X an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused.
-
Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (24 000 900)
Statement Not upheld Antisocial behaviour 06-Nov-2024
Summary: Mr X complained the Council issued him with a Community Protection Warning without giving him the chance to defend himself. He said the allegation was unfounded, but the Council did not verify events with any of his neighbours and did not provide any evidence for its decision. We found no fault in the Council’s decision to issue Mr X a Community Protection Warning.
-
Statement Upheld School transport 06-Nov-2024
Summary: There was fault by the Council in failing to seek confirmation of whether a pupil had previously hit staff on school transport before reaching a decision about the nature of transport required. The Council will apologise, provide a payment to remedy injustice and make service improvements. The complaint is upheld.
-
City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (24 003 714)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 06-Nov-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about traffic management because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
-
London Borough of Hackney (24 006 261)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 06-Nov-2024
Summary: Mr B complained that the Council had delayed since June 2024 in finding him suitable accommodation which caused him distress and inconvenience. The Council has now found him a suitable property which he has accepted and does not wish to pursue his complaint. We have found some delay in the time taken to find alternative accommodation, but we do not consider this caused Mr B an injustice which warrants any further remedy.
-
Nottingham City Council (24 006 546)
Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 06-Nov-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about missed recycling waste collections. The Council has now taken satisfactory action in response to the complaint.
-
Fylde Borough Council (24 006 742)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 06-Nov-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s record keeping as it does not cause the complainant sufficient injustice to warrant our further involvement.
-
South Gloucestershire Council (24 006 846)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 06-Nov-2024
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to take planning enforcement against building works near the complainant’s property. Part of the complaint is late, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in relation to a recently constructed wall, and we will not look at the associated concerns about complaint handling in isolation.
-
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 06-Nov-2024
Summary: Miss Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her child, Z’s education and Education Health and Care Plan. We have found fault by the Council, causing injustice, in failing to: properly consider alternative provision for Z in May 2022; complete Z’s transition review within the statutory timescales; and communicate about the amended EHC Plan. And with its poor complaint handling process and SENDIASS service failure. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by apologising, making a payment to recognise Miss Y and Z’s distress and service improvements.
-
Surrey County Council (23 016 869)
Statement Upheld School transport 06-Nov-2024
Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council administers school transport applications for children in her village. We do not find fault with how the Council assesses these applications. We find the Council at fault for delays in considering Miss X’s appeal, and for providing incorrect information but we find the Council has already taken sufficient action to address this.