Disabled children


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (23 008 883)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled children 24-Oct-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide a piece of equipment the complaint asked for to help her care for her child. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

  • South Gloucestershire Council (23 005 373)

    Report Upheld Disabled children 24-Oct-2023

    Summary: The Council has failed to provide the agreed support packages to disabled children and young people in its area.

  • Torbay Council (23 001 445)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled children 23-Oct-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to consider his request for his child’s direct payments to be used to fund his child’s trips to another city. This is because an investigation would not lead to any different findings or outcomes.

  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (23 002 171)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 11-Oct-2023

    Summary: Mrs X complained she waited over a year for the Council to complete a child in need assessment for her disabled child, Y. She complained she had four allocated social workers and did not receive the assessment until one year after it was originally allocated to the social work team. Mrs X said Y was unable to access appropriate support and this impacted his health, as well as the rest of the family’s health. There was fault in the way the Council delayed completing Y’s assessment and did not complete the children’s statutory complaints process. Mrs X was put to time and trouble to complain. Mrs X was frustrated by the delay and Y’s needs were not assessed in a timely manner to ensure his needs were met. The Council should apologise, make a financial payment, conduct a review to identify the causes of the delays in this complaint and produce an action plan to address the causes of the delays identified.

  • Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (23 007 795)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 04-Oct-2023

    Summary: I uphold this complaint that the Council unreasonably denied the complainant the opportunity to escalate her complaint about its eligibility criteria for direct payments for disabled children. The Council has agreed to resolve the matter by offering the complainant the opportunity to escalate her complaint to Stage 2 of the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services.

  • Peterborough City Council (23 007 994)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled children 01-Oct-2023

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about an attempt by the Council to remove Ms X’s child. The matter complained of is not separable from matters that either have been or could reasonably be raised in court.

  • West Sussex County Council (23 005 718)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled children 20-Sep-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the refusal of an application for a blue badge. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to warrant investigation.

  • Somerset Council (23 002 603)

    Statement Upheld Disabled children 12-Sep-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council failing to reply to her Children Services complaint properly. It has now agreed to do so.

  • Worcestershire County Council (23 006 421)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled children 10-Sep-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the information the Council gave her about an investigation. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed.

  • North Yorkshire Council (23 005 585)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Disabled children 03-Sep-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his child’s care and support needs. He says the Council failed to support him after he raised concerns about his child’s care package and put his child at risk by changing the care and support arrangements without first holding a best interest meeting. This is because an investigation would not lead to any different findings or outcomes.

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.

Privacy settings