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.

Other


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Staffordshire County Council (20 006 912)

    Statement Upheld Other 11-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mrs B complains the Council did not consider her statutory children's services complaint correctly. She also complains the Council did not update her about its implementation of the recommendations it agreed to. We found fault with the Council. It delayed the complaint investigation and did not update Mrs B about the actions it took to complete the stage 3 recommendations. These faults caused Mrs B frustration. The Council will apologise to Mrs B and pay a financial remedy.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (19 020 817)

    Statement Upheld Other 03-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council's failure to hold Child in Need meetings resulted in it receiving a safeguarding referral about her child. The Council has investigated and found it failed to follow Child in Need procedures. That caused Mrs X avoidable uncertainty and distress and meant her children may have missed the opportunity of further support. The Council has offered an appropriate financial remedy for any injustice caused.

  • London Borough of Brent (20 008 715)

    Statement Upheld Other 02-Jun-2021

    Summary: Ms B complained about the rate of direct payments she received for her disabled daughter. She said she could not purchase sufficient care to meet her needs and the payment did not recognise the complexity of those needs. She says she was forced to give up direct payments to get a suitable care package. The Council was at fault in failing to investigate the complaint under the statutory complaints procedure and Ms B was put to time and trouble in pursuing the complaint with the Ombudsman. The Council has agreed to start a statutory stage 2 investigation into the complaint and make a payment to Ms B in recognition of her time and trouble.

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (20 005 972)

    Statement Upheld Other 27-May-2021

    Summary: there was fault by Kingston Upon Hull City Council in relation to Ms B's complaint about delay in referring her for suitable support following the completion of legal proceedings in late 2019. There was also avoidable delay in the consideration of her complaint under the statutory children's complaints procedure. These faults caused Ms B injustice and the Council will take the recommended action to recognise this and ensure that such fault does not occur in future

  • Herefordshire Council (20 007 894)

    Statement Upheld Other 26-May-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to attend his son's Mental Health Tribunals or prepare a report for them. The Council was at fault. This caused unnecessary distress to Mr X and his son. The Council will make a payment and remind staff they must attend Tribunal hearings where requested and prepare reports according to the guidance.

  • London Borough of Sutton (20 006 932)

    Statement Upheld Other 25-May-2021

    Summary: We find fault with the Council for failing to carry out all the agreed actions from a statutory complaint process. This caused Ms B and her daughter an injustice. The Council agrees actions to remedy the injustice.

  • Devon County Council (20 007 938)

    Statement Not upheld Other 25-May-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council has not dealt properly with care arrangements for his son Y. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint because we cannot look at what happened in court and the complaints process was not flawed.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 002 776)

    Statement Upheld Other 21-May-2021

    Summary: Ms B complains the Council's decision to hold a child protection conference without informing her and with a male chairperson. She says the Council did not consider the history of the case and this caused distress. The Ombudsman finds fault but does not find this caused a significant injustice to Ms B.

  • Worcestershire County Council (20 002 509)

    Statement Not upheld Other 20-May-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council gave incorrect information about a safeguarding matter to a voluntary organisation in which he held a senior position. He says this led to his membership being cancelled. I find no fault with the way the Council carried out its role. The voluntary organisation decides whether to use Mr X's services and whether to make a referral to the DBS if it is concerned about Mr X's suitability to work with children. These decisions are outside the Ombudsman's jurisdiction.

  • West Sussex County Council (20 006 409)

    Statement Upheld Other 20-May-2021

    Summary: Miss X complained about the Council's refusal to investigate her complaint about the involvement of Children's Services with her family, on the basis that it was out of time. We find that the Council was at fault. It did not properly consider her reasons for the delay or whether the complaint could be investigated under the statutory children's social care complaints procedure. The Council has agreed to now investigate the complaint at stage 2 of the statutory process, after deciding whether some parts of the complaint should be included. This is a suitable remedy.