Decision search
Your search has 52408 results
-
Kent County Council (25 003 643)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 19-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled an assessment for court proceedings regarding his child. The law prevents us from investigating the Council’s conduct related to court proceedings. We will not investigate anything that could be reasonably raised in court.
-
London Borough of Lewisham (25 003 680)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 19-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about matters related to the Council’s data handling. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to respond to Ms X’s complaint.
-
Staffordshire County Council (25 003 691)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 19-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alleged breach of personal information. The Information Commissioner’s Officer is better placed to deal with the complaint.
-
Archbishop Beck Catholic College (25 004 588)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries School admissions 18-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about an unsuccessful appeal for a school place. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the panel for us to be able to question its decision.
-
West Lindsey District Council (25 005 492)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 18-Jun-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate Mr C’s complaint about the Council’s refusal of his planning applications because Mr C appealed to the Planning Inspector. We do not have the power to investigate the actions of the Planning Inspector.
-
London Borough of Southwark (25 005 496)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 18-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to make formal representations, and if needed, put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
-
Shropshire Council (24 005 061)
Statement Upheld Charging 18-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his father’s care charges. The Council was at fault for failing to keep proper records and give reasons for its decisions, delaying in sending financial assessment forms and deciding on Mr Y’s care contribution, failing to provide copies of Care Act assessments, sending incorrect invoices, and continuing to send invoices despite saying the account was on hold. This caused Mr X distress and uncertainty. The Council will apologise for this and provide an updated correct invoice.
-
London Borough of Lambeth (24 009 839)
Statement Upheld Other 18-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr Y complained on behalf of Mr X who owns a business. Mr Y complained about how the Council handled Mr X’s business rates account. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to Mr X’s business. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.
-
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 18-Jun-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to provide a suitable educational placement and special educational needs support for her daughter, Y, since her permanent exclusion from college in April 2024. We found the Council to be at fault because failed to carry out an emergency review, took too long to consult with appropriate potential providers and did not provide any alternative provision for seven months. As a result, Y’s well-being and mental health were affected. To remedy this injustice, as well as the loss of provision, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment and remind relevant staff of the need to make prompt alternative arrangements when a placement unexpectedly ends.
-
Hertfordshire County Council (24 011 585)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 18-Jun-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to arrange suitable education provision for her child, W, when they stopped attending school. The Council did not properly consider whether W was out of school for health reasons but we cannot say, even on balance, that this meant W missed out on education they should have had. The Council was at fault for delay in amending W’s Education, Health and Care Plan. To remedy the injustice this caused, the Council will apologise to Mrs X and pay her £800. It will also issue a staff reminder.