Disabled children

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Lancashire County Council (20 000 760)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled children 20-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complained the Council carried out an unfair and biased internal audit investigation into her administration of her children's direct payments without giving her the opportunity to present evidence in her defence. I have discontinued this investigation. The Council carried out its internal investigation with the intention of passing it to the police for it carry out a criminal investigation. Therefore, it is unlikely we would find fault for not initially involving Mrs X in its investigation. The police declined to carry out a criminal investigation and Mrs X already has the opportunity to present her evidence in defence of the Council's findings as part of an ongoing mediation process. It is unlikely that further investigation by the Ombudsman would lead to a different outcome

  • London Borough of Redbridge (19 011 844)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 15-Oct-2020

    Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to deliver the short breaks provision set out in her sons' Education Health and Care plans from September 2018, and failed to provide timely information about changes to that provision following a procurement exercise. She also complained about a lack of support for her sons in their transition to adult services. The Council was at fault for a delay in communicating in writing about the changes it was making to its short breaks service, a failure to deliver some of the provision Ms X's sons were entitled to in September 2018, a failure to start planning for their transition to adulthood early enough and significant delays in the complaints handling process. It should make a payment to remedy the injustice caused by the disruption to services and Ms X's time and trouble in pursuing the matter. It should also review its processes.

  • North East Lincolnshire Council (19 012 848)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 06-Oct-2020

    Summary: There was fault by the Council in its handling of a request for direct payments, as part of an Education, Health and Care plan. This caused an injustice, because it did not make clear to the complainant what it had agreed. It also did not offer the complainant a right to request a review of its decision, which is required by the statutory guidance. The Council has agreed to offer a financial remedy for the uncertainty and frustration this has caused, and also ensure it has a mechanism to review its decisions.

  • Thurrock Council (19 009 685)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 02-Oct-2020

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain about the level of support their son received from the Council in assessing his social care needs. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for the delay in sending her an amended child and family assessment and for delaying in re-assessing her son's needs after respite was cancelled. This meant Mr and Mrs X's son did not receive the respite he was likely entitled to. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (19 007 802)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 04-Sep-2020

    Summary: Mr X complains of several failings by the Council in making SEN provision for his son, Z, causing loss of education and stress for the family. Some of the matters complained of are outside our jurisdiction, and the Council was not at fault in others, but it took too long to issue an Education Health and Care Plan for Z, and failed to consider Mr X's complaint under the correct statutory procedure, despite two elements of the complaint being social care matters. However, these faults did not cause the injustice the family suffered.

  • Luton Borough Council (19 009 477)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 02-Sep-2020

    Summary: the Council was at fault in its handling of Ms D's complaint and it will apologise and make the recommended payment to recognise the injustice this caused. There is no fault in the Council's actions with regard to the rest of the complaint

  • Kent County Council (19 020 166)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled children 28-Aug-2020

    Summary: Mr C wanted the Council to assess E for a service from the Disabled Children's Service as it had assessed E's older brother, who was receiving support. There is no evidence of fault in the Council refusing to assess E for a service from the Disabled Children's Service as he has no diagnosis of a disability.

  • Birmingham City Council (19 008 289)

    Statement Not upheld Disabled children 21-Aug-2020

    Summary: Mr B complained the Council's occupational therapy service for children did not assess his brother's needs correctly or give him the right equipment. Mr B says Mr C missed out on services he was entitled to and this delayed his development and led to the deterioration of their parent's health. The Ombudsman has not found fault with the Council.

  • Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council (19 012 176)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 22-Jul-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains about the actions of the Council in respect of care for his disabled children. Where his complaint concerns social care, which is the responsibility of the Council, the statutory three-stage procedure for children's services complaints applies. That procedure has not yet been completed. The Council has indicated its willingness to compete the process and that is the appropriate way for Mr B to pursue his complaint at this time. On this basis, the Ombudsman has discontinued his consideration of this complaint. Where Mr B's complaint concerns respite provision and the principal issue is one of clinical care, the appropriate service to deal with this is the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

  • London Borough of Havering (19 005 362)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 10-Jul-2020

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B complained the Council failed to provide their daughter with a suitable home chair, wrongly began a safeguarding investigation and delayed responding to a complaint. Delays providing the home chair were not due to fault by the Council. A single assessment completed by the Council was inaccurate and the Council delayed responding to Mr and Mrs B's complaint. That led to Mr and Mrs B having to go to time and trouble to pursue their complaint and caused them distress. A payment to Mr and Mrs B and an apology is satisfactory remedy.

Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.