Decision search
Your search has 52042 results
-
Buckinghamshire Council (24 021 745)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 27-Mar-2025
Summary: We cannot by law investigate this complaint about the Council issuing the complainant a penalty charge notice. This is because the complainant has appealed the notice to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The law says we have no jurisdiction to investigate in these circumstances.
-
Lancashire County Council (24 022 747)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 27-Mar-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
-
Hampshire County Council (24 003 218)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs P complained the Council did not make arrangements to receive alternative provision when her daughter’s attendance at school deteriorated. We do not consider the Council was at fault for its decision not to arrange alternative provision, but we find fault for the Council’s extensive delays in responding to Mrs P and for arranging a meeting it had promised, which caused distress, frustration and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to apologise and offer a financial remedy to reflect this.
-
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 27-Mar-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide appropriate education for her child, Y and delayed issuing him with a final Education Health and Care Plan. She also complained its communication with her was poor. We found fault by the Council on all parts of Mrs X’s complaint. As a result Y missed education he was entitled to, and he and Mrs X were caused distress, frustration and put to avoidable time and trouble. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mrs X and Y in recognition of the injustice caused to them.
-
Slough Borough Council (24 004 675)
Statement Upheld Homelessness 27-Mar-2025
Summary: Ms Y complains the Council handled Mr X’s homelessness application poorly. She says this caused Mr X to be homeless which impacted his health. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X and take service improvement action.
-
Bristol City Council (24 004 803)
Statement Upheld Other 27-Mar-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure his child’s nursery provided funded childcare hours free of charge and said the provider instead applied mandatory top-up fees. Because of this, Mr X said that over five months, he was charged £1,173 more than he should have been for childcare hours that should have been free. The Council delayed carrying out an audit into the nursery and this was fault. However it took appropriate action by auditing the provider and instructing it to make changes. The provider still has not made the required changes but this is not due to lack of action by the Council. The Council has agreed to take further steps to bring the childcare provider into compliance.
-
Surrey County Council (24 004 945)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 27-Mar-2025
Summary: Mr X says the Council failed to properly consider the impact on trees and hedgerows when granting planning permission, failed to properly assess trees, failed to follow the petition process and failed to respond to his complaint properly. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council handled the planning application or in its assessment of the trees. The Council did not follow the petition process fully and did not respond to all parts of the complaint. An apology, reminder to officers and a response to the complaint issues missed is satisfactory remedy.
-
London Borough of Newham (24 005 745)
Statement Upheld Charging 27-Mar-2025
Summary: Mr X complained the Council had failed to tell him his aunt (Miss Y) would be liable for some of the costs of residential care arranged for her by the Council. We found fault with the Council for not providing Mr X with enough information about charging for Miss Y’s residential care services. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Miss Y and Mr X. The Council has agreed to apologise, discuss a payment plan with Mr X and make payments to recognise Miss Y’s and Mr X’s distress. The Council has also agreed to carry out some service improvements.
-
London Borough of Croydon (24 006 122)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 27-Mar-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about what happened during the Council’s ‘buy back’ of Miss X’s leasehold property due to a regeneration project. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Council has already offered a suitable financial remedy for the delays and uncertainty caused to Miss X. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by the Ombudsman starting an investigation.
-
Shropshire Council (24 006 354)
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 27-Mar-2025
Summary: There were failings in the domiciliary care provided to Mrs Y, which the care agency acknowledged and dealt with before the complaint came to this office. However, it failed to communicate its actions to Mrs X and failed to apologise for the actions of its carers. We have made a recommendation to address this.