Decision search
Your search has 52726 results
-
St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council (24 007 341)
Statement Not upheld Friends and family carers 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained that the Council failed to pay her the allowance due to her as a kinship carer. We have found no fault. The Council properly considered the circumstances of the case and made a decision which was consistent with the requirements of government guidance.
-
WCG Riverside Care Home Limited (24 007 541)
Statement Upheld Residential care 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Miss X complained about the quality of care provided to her mother at the care home. There were some faults with the care provided as the care provider failed to change Mrs Y’s bedding, left a dirty pad in Mrs Y’s room, did not always record when it checked Mrs Y’s incontinence pad and fingernails, and it did not complete a choking risk assessment despite Mrs Y’s tendency to put things in her mouth. It also failed to fully follow its complaints procedure. The care provider has already taken action to address the faults with the quality of care. It should apologise and make a payment to Miss X to acknowledge the frustration and uncertainty she was caused. It should also remind staff to respond in writing to formal complaints.
-
Devon County Council (24 007 885)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Miss X complained the Council delayed completing her child, Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment in line with statutory timescales. The Council was at fault. It delayed deciding whether to issue Y with an EHC Plan within the statutory timescales, caused by a 4 week delay in obtaining Educational Psychologist advice. It then further delayed issuing Y’s final EHC Plan by 22 weeks after it received the EP advice. The Council agreed to make payments to Miss X to acknowledge the frustration, uncertainty and delayed appeal rights caused by the delays.
-
Worcestershire County Council (24 008 144)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Feb-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault because it delayed completing an annual review of a young person’s education, health and care plan, which meant she was without educational provision for a period of time. The Council has agreed to offer a financial remedy to the young person, and the complainant, to reflect the impact on them, as well as writing a letter of apology. The Council was not at fault for not reviewing the alternative provision the young person was receiving, because she was over compulsory school age and this requirement no longer applied.
-
London Borough of Haringey (24 008 874)
Statement Upheld Domiciliary care 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs Z complained about the Council’s failure to ensure Mr X had somebody to take decisions about his welfare and finances. We found fault with the Council for delaying a Mental Capacity assessment for the complainant (Mr X) and for not acting to appoint a person who could take decisions about Mr X’s welfare and finances. The Council’s failings caused injustice to Mr X. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X, to apply for the appointment of a deputy and to carry out some service improvements.
-
Essex County Council (24 009 222)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to arrange education and delivery of Child Y’s EHCP, which meant they were without support and provision. We find fault with the Council for failing to ensure delivery of Child Y’s EHCP following the tribunal order. The Council has agreed to make a financial payment in recognition of distress and lost provision.
-
North East Lincolnshire Council (24 009 361)
Statement Not upheld Private housing 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Ms X complained about the way works were carried out on her property under a grant provided by the Council. The Ombudsman does not find the Council to be at fault.
-
Nottinghamshire County Council (24 009 735)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her daughter with an education and the special educational provision in her Education, Health and Care Plan. We have ended our investigation into Mrs X’s complaint because she used her right to appeal to the SEND Tribunal. Her complaint therefore falls outside our jurisdiction.
-
Leeds City Council (24 009 972)
Statement Not upheld Special educational needs 25-Feb-2025
Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint about special educational need. This is because it concerns matters which we have addressed in previous decisions, which are subject to an ongoing appeal to the Tribunal, and/or which did not form part of a complaint to the Council.
-
Slough Borough Council (24 010 130)
Statement Not upheld Council house sales and leaseholders 25-Feb-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained about the way the Council carried out the Right to Buy process for her. The Council accepted its failings and offered a suitable remedy. We have discontinued this investigation as there is nothing else we can achieve.