Decision search
Your search has 53229 results
-
Sunderland City Council (24 014 625)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to provide a suitable education and support for her grandchild’s (Y) special educational needs. We found the Council to be at fault because it failed to provide alternative education whilst a school place was found and took too long to issue a revised Education Health and Care Plan. This caused distress and affected the welfare of Mrs X and Y. To remedy this injustice, the Council agreed to make a payment to Mrs X and take action to improve its service.
-
Cambridgeshire County Council (24 014 900)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Jul-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault. It delayed reviewing Mr X’s child, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and subsequently, delayed securing a placement. It failed to provide Y with some provision including speech and language therapy (SALT). The Council also delayed responding to Mr X’s complaint. This caused Mr X distress, frustration and uncertainty and Y was without a placement for a prolonged period of time. The Council apologised to Mr X and said it would make service improvements to prevent a recurrence of the fault. The Council has agreed it will also offer a further apology to Mr X and a payment to recognise Y’s lost provision and for the injustice it caused to Mr X. It will also remind staff to follow its complaints procedure when responding to complaints.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 015 200)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Jul-2025
Summary: We have found fault with the Council for failing to secure all the special educational need provision in Miss X’s son’s Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused him to miss out on the support he needed which affected his behaviour and attendance at school. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and make a payment to remedy Miss X’s and her son’s injustice.
-
Maldon District Council (24 015 871)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 27-Jul-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to properly advertise a planning application near is property and failed to consider the impact on his residential amenity. There was fault in relation to the advertising of the planning application but this did not impact on the decision to approve the application. We have investigated the issues raised by Mr X about the impact on his residential amenity and found no evidence of further fault.
-
Cambridgeshire County Council (24 016 204)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs Y complained about the way the Council dealt with her child Z’s educational provision. We have found fault by the Council, causing injustice, in its: delay completing the EHC needs assessment; delay issuing the final EHC Plan; communication failures; and failure to properly consider its duty to, and, provide Z with suitable alternative provision. To remedy the injustice the Council has agreed to: apologise and make payments to recognise the impact of the missed education: and upset, frustration and uncertainty.
-
London Borough of Redbridge (24 017 062)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 27-Jul-2025
Summary: We found fault by the Council on Mr Y’s complaint about it placing him in unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council accepted it was unsuitable but failed to move him. It also failed to show it properly assessed whether the accommodation was suitable before placing him in it. The Council agreed to apologise for the failings, pay £1,050 for the distress called, continue to pay £150 a month until he is moved to suitable accommodation or refuses a suitable offer, and remind relevant officers of the need to assess, and record, the suitability of accommodation before placing applicants in them. There was no fault on his complaint about it placing him the wrong Band under its allocation scheme.
-
Derbyshire County Council (24 017 437)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 27-Jul-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to ensure her son P and daughter R received suitable education and special educational needs support, after the family moved to the Council’s area. The Council failed to pay a financial remedy it promised Mrs X for education P and R missed in a previous school year; the Council agreed to now pay this. Fault by the Council also meant R missed education and special educational needs support in the next school year, Mrs X experienced avoidable time and trouble complaining, and the whole family experienced distress. The Council agreed to apologise and pay a financial remedy. It will also properly consider what education is suitable for R, and act to ensure it does not miss complaints and properly completes agreed complaint outcomes. I could not investigate parts of Mrs X’s complaint that were not the responsibility of the Council. I also could not consider issues which overlapped with an appeal she made to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) about P’s Education, Health, and Care Plan.
-
Essex County Council (24 017 933)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Jul-2025
Summary: We have found the Council at fault for failing to issue a final amended Education, Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales. This delayed Mrs X’s appeal rights. The Council also failed to secure suitable alternative provision when Mrs X’s son was unable to attend school. The Council has agreed to apologise, issue the EHC Plan urgently and pay Mrs X a financial remedy.
-
London Borough of Tower Hamlets (24 018 188)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 27-Jul-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council failed to keep accurate records of her housing application. This is because there is insufficient evidence of significant injustice to Ms X to justify an investigation.
-
Lancashire County Council (24 018 243)
Statement Not upheld Safeguarding 27-Jul-2025
Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the Council’s handling of safeguarding incidents in a care home. This is because we have already considered and upheld this matter in a previous investigation. We also consider the Council’s own investigation is satisfactory, and so there could be no worthwhile outcome to further investigation anyway.