Decision search
Your search has 52968 results
-
Statement Upheld Safeguarding 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Lifeways Community Care Limited (the Care Provider), and the Council found that Mr K’s care and support was inadequate. The Council found that this put him at risk of abuse and neglect. Mr K was caused distress and had to move home. The Care Provider did not handle the complaint properly. The Council initially failed to handle the safeguarding concern appropriately. It did rectify this and has taken robust action to make sure that it does not commission further until the Care Provider makes improvements. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr K’s sister who acts on his behalf, and make a payment to Mr K and his sister in recognition of the distress it has caused them both.
-
Slough Borough Council (24 011 925)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his request to change the educational placement named in is child’s Educational, Health and Care Plan. We found the Council at fault in reviewing the Plan and dealing with Mr X’s resulting complaint. These faults caused Mr X avoidable distress and put him to avoidable time and trouble. The Council agreed to carry out a new review, apologise to Mr X and pay him £600 in recognition of the injustice caused by its avoidable delays and other faults.
-
North Yorkshire Council (24 012 298)
Statement Upheld Alternative provision 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to ensure suitable education for her son (A) when he was out of school. We found fault in the way the Council discharged its Section 19 duty towards A and in its complaint handling. The Council’s fault caused injustice to A as he missed education and to Miss X as she was distressed at the lack of support for A. The Council agreed to apologise and make payments to Miss X to recognise A’s loss of education and her distress. In recent complaints we have recommended relevant service improvements, which we will monitor.
-
Hampshire County Council (24 012 888)
Statement Upheld Other 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Ms Y, on behalf of Mr X, complained about the Council’s handling of his care and support needs, as well as its failure to oversee the completion of a housing adaptation, leaving the work unfinished. We find the Council at fault for failing to respond to contact, properly consider safeguarding referrals, carry out required assessments, take reasonable steps to arrange appropriate care support, and ensure the housing adaptation was completed. These failings caused Mr X distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr X, and improve its services.
-
Surrey County Council (24 013 375)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to respond to her request for an urgent annual review of her child Y’s Education Health and Care Plan. There was fault by the Council, including a failure to consider its duty to arrange alternative educational provision or secure special educational provision, failures in communication, poor complaint handling and a failure to amend Y’s Plan within the required timescales. This caused avoidable frustration, uncertainty and a financial loss. The Council will apologise and make payments.
-
Birmingham City Council (24 013 404)
Statement Upheld Refuse and recycling 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council has failed to provide a replacement pod for her recycled paper and cardboard despite first requesting this in June 2023. Ms X also complained the Council has failed to provide a replacement household waste bin. We found the delays in providing a replacement pod and household waste bin are fault. This fault has caused Ms X frustration and inconvenience. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment.
-
London Borough of Bromley (24 013 750)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to issue an amended Education, Health and Care Plan within the statutory timeframe, failure to provide support for her son’s (Y) special educational needs as well as poor communication and complaint handling. We found the Council to be at fault. This caused distress, frustration and had an impact on Y’s development. To remedy this injustice, the Council agreed to apologise, make a symbolic payment to Miss X and ensure delivery of missed provision.
-
East Sussex County Council (24 013 940)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that her child missed educational provision. There was a delay in holding an annual review and in sending the final Education, Health and Care Plan after that review. This delayed the Council being aware that a child was out of school. The Council was at fault as it did not check that provision was being put in place by a school after it had been told that a child was not attending school. A payment remedies the uncertainty caused to Mrs X, who will never know if other provision could have been put in place earlier if the monitoring had occurred.
-
Bristol City Council (24 014 053)
Statement Not upheld Other 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s response to issues caused by a vehicle dweller encampment close to his home. There is no fault in the Council’s decision making process, it has made decisions in accordance with its policy. The Council is due to review the policy to ensure it is clear and consistent, taking into account views of residents and vehicle dwellers. The Council also carried out the actions it promised in its response to Mr X’s complaint.
-
London Borough of Hackney (24 014 261)
Statement Upheld Allocations 22-Jun-2025
Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed reviewing its decision on her housing register application. When it did the review, Miss X complained it failed to consider the relevant medical evidence when deciding her priority award. She also complained the Council prevented her from bidding on adapted properties, despite needing one due to her disabilities. The Council significantly delayed reviewing its decision which was fault. The Council then carried out the review and there was no fault in how it reached its decision. It also did not prevent Miss X from bidding on adapted properties. The Council has agreed to provide evidence that it has paid the £200 it offered Miss X in its stage two response to remedy the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the delay in carrying out the review.