Decision search
Your search has 55054 results
-
Stevenage Borough Council (25 000 569)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 28-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not cut back an overhanging tree as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council. We will not investigate the complaint about damage as this is a matter for the courts.
-
Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (25 000 806)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 28-May-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s issue of a penalty charge notice and its handling of his appeal against the notice. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals and the law does not allow us to investigate the Council’s conduct as part of the appeals process.
-
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Parking and other penalties 28-May-2025
Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about London Tribunals’ handling of his appeal against a penalty charge notice. This is because the complaint concerns the way the adjudicators considered Mr X’s case and reached their decision on the appeal and the only way to challenge this is by Judicial Review at the High Court.
-
Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (25 001 497)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Land 28-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decisions about the management of land it owns because there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision-making and because we could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants.
-
Bedford Borough Council (24 007 643)
Statement Upheld Land 28-May-2025
Summary: Ms C complained on behalf of her client Ms D, that the Council did not honour a commitment it gave that she could move on to a pitch at a Gypsy and Traveller site. We upheld the complaint, finding the Council should not have withdrawn its offer to Ms D. Its actions caused her distress and meant she missed an opportunity to move on to the site. The Council had recognised fault in its communications with Ms D. It had apologised and offered a symbolic payment. But we considered these measures did not adequately remedy Ms D’s injustice. The Council accepted our findings and agreed to increase its symbolic payment to Ms D and allocate the next available pitch at the site to her. It also agreed to consider a series of concerns we highlighted about its existing allocations policy as part of a review of that policy.
-
East Sussex County Council (24 008 243)
Statement Not upheld Assessment and care plan 28-May-2025
Summary: There was no fault by the Council which met Mr Y’s eligible care and support needs while it identified a suitable supported living placement for him and put in place funding to enable Mr Y to receive care and support while his mother Ms X worked.
-
Wokingham Borough Council (24 009 307)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 28-May-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to secure the provision set out in her son, Y’s Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan, and failed to issue an amended plan within the correct timescale for a phase transfer. We found the Council was at fault for delays and failing to secure all provision in Y’s EHC Plan. This Council agreed to apologise and provide symbolic financial payments for the distress and uncertainty caused.
-
Liverpool City Council (24 010 960)
Statement Upheld Other 28-May-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly assess her child for disabled children’s services, and did not properly investigate her complaint about this under the statutory complaints procedure for children’s social care services. The Council properly considered Mrs X’s complaint via the statutory procedure. However, it failed to properly follow up on one of the actions it agreed, to repay Mrs X for direct payments missed due to delays. This caused Mrs X financial loss, and avoidable time and trouble in pursuing her complaint further. The Council agreed to apologise and pay Mrs X the remaining money she is due.
-
Surrey County Council (24 020 294)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Traffic management 27-May-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of a petition as Mr X could have sought a formal review of this.
-
Salford City Council (23 015 691)
Statement Upheld Disabled children 27-May-2025
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to properly carry out a child in need assessment in 2021 and wrongly declined to carry out assessments in 2022. She complained this led to a long delay in properly assessing their needs as a family and a delay in providing respite support. She also complained there was a delay in providing Direct Payments once support was agreed. A statutory investigation upheld the complaint and achieved a proper assessment for Ms X. We found there was fault by the Council and that there was outstanding injustice that warranted a remedy. We recommended an apology and a payment to recognise the distress and difficult circumstances Ms X was left in while support was not being provided.