Decision search
Your search has 53231 results
-
North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (25 006 160)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Councillor conduct and standards 21-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 21-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about council tax support because Mrs X has appealed to the Valuation Tribunal.
-
Manchester City Council (25 009 686)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 21-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for an alleged bus lane contravention. This is because it is reasonable for him to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
-
Wiltshire Council (25 009 947)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Highway repair and maintenance 21-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that her car was damaged after driving on a newly re-surfaced road. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to pursue her compensation claim by taking the Council to court.
-
London Borough of Barnet (24 003 753)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 20-Aug-2025
Summary: Mr F complained the Council failed to properly consider a planning application for development next to his home. We found no fault in the way the Council determined the planning application or carried out its enforcement investigation. There was fault in complaint handling which caused Mr F some time and trouble. The Council has agreed to apologise for this.
-
Leicestershire County Council (24 009 377)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 20-Aug-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council delayed issuing an Education, Health and Care Plan after a needs assessment. There was 6 months delay by the Council, which was fault. A payment remedies the injustice to Mrs X. There was also delay in providing Speech and Language and Occupational Therapy provision, which could have been provided separately to the school setting which Mrs X disputed at tribunal. An apology and payment remedies the frustration and distress, and loss of provision to Y, the child.
-
Lancashire County Council (24 012 189)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 20-Aug-2025
Summary: We upheld Ms X’s complaint about delays issuing Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan. This caused avoidable frustration, uncertainty and a delay in appeal rights. We also upheld Ms X complaint about poor communication and complaint handling which caused avoidable frustration. We found the Council acted in line with the law and relevant guidance by putting in place a reintegration plan and tailored support for Y as well as part-time alternative educational provision. So we did not uphold the complaint about a failure to provide full-time educational provision. The Council will apologise and make payments to Ms X.
-
Warwickshire County Council (24 013 183)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 20-Aug-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the care and support the Council arranged for Mr X. This is because we could not add to investigation the Council has already carried out, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X and his mother want.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 014 362)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 20-Aug-2025
Summary: Mr X complained that his young adult son (Y) had not received the provision in his Education, Health and Care Plan. There was fault. The Council did not keep under review whether Y had become able to access therapy and tuition again and delayed carrying out an annual review. Considering the way to move forward remedies the injustice to Y.
-
Lancashire County Council (24 015 383)
Statement Upheld Other 20-Aug-2025
Summary: Mrs A complained that delays by the Council lost the opportunity for her disabled daughter Ms X to attend the placement which would have best met her needs. There were delays which caused injustice to Mrs A and Ms X but the Council’s decision not to fund the preferred placement was not fault. Ms X is now settled in a suitable placement.