Decision search
Your search has 51670 results
-
Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (24 010 087)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 30-Apr-2025
Summary: The Council failed to review Mrs M’s son B’s education, health and care (EHC) plan in 2023 and acknowledged that it missed opportunities to check he was receiving suitable education. However, the evidence available suggests it is unlikely there was a need for the Council to have made alternative arrangements for B’s education.
-
Bury Metropolitan Borough Council (24 010 094)
Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council’s waste collections are unreliable, there is poor communication between departments, and it ignored his freedom of information request. Mr X said he had to go to the tip because his waste was not collected. He said it caused stress and anxiety, and there are now issues with rats and fruit flies. We find the Council at fault and this caused injustice. The Council will apologise and make a payment to Mr X.
-
Southampton City Council (24 010 194)
Statement Upheld Transition from childrens services 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s handling of her child’s care and support when he turned 18. We find no fault in the Council’s overall decision making but do find fault for it failing to consider Mrs X’s request for an additional day at Placement A. This caused Mrs X uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X.
-
Hampshire County Council (24 010 249)
Statement Upheld Charging 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Ms D complained the Council sent her a bill for her late grandfather’s (Mr X) care, eight months after he died and after his estate was distributed. Based on current evidence, the Council is at fault for poor communication which caused a delay in it being notified of Mr X’s death. This caused Ms D emotional distress and will potentially cause her financial distress. I have recommended the Council asks Ms D for information about the debt and estate so it can reconsider the amount. I have also recommended the Council offers Ms D a payment plan for any remaining debt.
-
Kent County Council (24 010 382)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council supported his child, Y’s, special educational needs. There was fault in how the Council failed to act when it became aware some of Y’s support was not being provided and in significant delays responding to Mr X’s complaint. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him a financial remedy.
-
London Borough of Ealing (24 010 445)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 30-Apr-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s representations to court. The law prevents us investigating the content of court reports.
-
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (24 010 955)
Statement Not upheld Councillor conduct and standards 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of a complaint she made about the conduct of a local Ward Councillor, causing her distress. We did not find fault in the Council’s consideration of Ms X’s complaint.
-
Leeds City Council (24 011 450)
Statement Not upheld Refuse and recycling 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Mx D complained the Council was regularly missing waste collections from a supported living facility. We have found the Council was not at fault.
-
Kent County Council (24 011 968)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 30-Apr-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s delay issuing her child, Y’s amended final Education, Health and Care Plan, failed to provide suitable alternative provision while Y was out of school, communicated poorly and delayed responding to her complaint. We find the Council at fault, causing Miss X avoidable distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X, and issue Y’s amended final EHC Plan.
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 012 288)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 30-Apr-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged failure by the Council to classify the complainant’s two properties as one dwelling for council tax purposes, or the valuation of these properties to inform the relevant banding. This is because the complainant could reasonably appeal to the Valuation Tribunal about these matters. All other issues raised by the complainant are either outside our legal jurisdiction, or should not be considered until the Council's complaints policy and procedure has been exhausted.