Decision search
Your search has 52968 results
-
Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (25 005 182)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Leisure and culture 15-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council altered a park. The complaint is late and there is no good reason why it could not have been made sooner.
-
London Borough of Wandsworth (24 014 250)
Statement Upheld Other 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to act when she contacted it with concerns about her late brother’s care and it was difficult to get in contact with anyone. She also complained the care home the Council commissioned failed to get an air mattress for her late brother before he went into hospital and the care home failed to treat his urine infection. We find fault with the care home’s communication with Mrs X and the care it provided to her late brother. The Council was at fault for its communication with Mrs X. These faults have caused Mrs X upset, distress and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to apologise to Mrs X and make a payment to her.
-
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed issuing her child’s first Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, did not provide a suitable secondary school place, and failed to provide alternative education. There was delay in issuing a final EHC Plan and delayed appeal rights, but no failure to provide education. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £1000 to acknowledge the fault, and make service improvements.
-
St Albans City Council (24 015 142)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained there was fault in the Council’s assessment of a neighbouring planning application. Mrs X said the new development will be overbearing, and she will suffer loss of privacy and reduced residential amenity. We found there was fault in the Council’s initial assessment of the application by considering it against the wrong policy. However, there was no injustice because the Council re-assessed the application under the correct policy. We found no fault in the Council’s updated assessment or decision-making.
-
St Albans City Council (24 015 242)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council assessed a neighbouring planning application. Mr X said the new development will be overbearing and cause loss of privacy and overlooking to his home. We found there was fault in the Council’s initial assessment of the application by considering it against the wrong policy. However, there was no injustice because the Council re-assessed the application under the correct policy. We found no fault in the Council’s updated assessment or decision-making.
-
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 015 718)
Statement Upheld School transport 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to suitably consider his application and appeal for home to school transport for his child. We did not find fault with the Council’s decision to refuse home to school transport for Mr X’s child. We did find fault with the Council failing to follow its process. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X for failing to follow its process. The Council also agreed to provide training to staff about following its process and including relevant information about how to appeal decisions.
-
Lovett Care Limited (24 016 717)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 12-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the standard of care she received whilst staying at a care home. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or worthwhile outcomes. In addition, there is another body better placed to consider her complaint about the Council’s handling of her personal data.
-
London Borough of Lambeth (24 017 014)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Allocations 12-Jun-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation provided by the Council under its homelessness duty. It was reasonable for Miss X to appeal against the Council’s review decision if she wished to challenge it.
-
Slough Borough Council (24 011 103)
Statement Upheld Other 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s actions linked to reports of a vehicle which belonged to him being abandoned. We found fault as the Council gave out an incorrect telephone number and did not respond to an email from Mr X in a timely manner. This caused Mr X avoidable distress. The Council has already apologised to Mr X and made a symbolic payment to him. We are satisfied this has remedied any injustice caused to Mr X.
-
Manchester City Council (24 012 289)
Statement Upheld Looked after children 12-Jun-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s care of her when she was a looked after child and the way it handled her complaint. Miss X said she felt blamed for things that happened when she was a child. She said this affected her mental health, and caused unnecessary and avoidable distress. We find the Council at fault and this caused injustice. The Council will apologise to Miss X.