Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 017 333)

Category : Children's care services > Disabled children

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 14 Mar 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X complaint about delays in telling her about a grant process. We are unlikely to add significantly to the Council’s reply to her complaint.

The complaint

  1. Mrs X says the Council did not reply to her complaint properly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
  • any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
  • we could not add to any previous investigation by the organization. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mrs X which included the Council’s reply to her.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In August 2024 Mrs X asked for information about how to apply for a grant for flooring for her disabled child’s bedroom. Eight days later she complained she had not had a reply.
  2. In October 2024, the Council replied to her complaint. It apologised for not replying to her request and for delays in the complaint response process. It explained the grant process and said it had requested an Occupational Therapist assess her case for a grant. Mrs X has confirmed this happened.
  3. Mrs X says the Council failed to respond to her complaint within the Council’s own timescales. She says there were oversights and general incompetence. She says this led to withholding of funding and deliberately prolonging the process. She says she has had to pay for the work herself.
  1. Our investigation would not add to the Council’s reply. Its apologies and explanation is a sufficient response to the relatively short delay in telling her of the process and starting that process.
  2. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are not investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to add significantly to the Council's response to her complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

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