Decision search
Your search has 53967 results
-
Herefordshire Council (24 008 257)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 23-Jan-2025
Summary: Ms C complained about the Council’s handling of the Education, Health, and Care plan process for her son (X) and his education when he stopped attending school. We found the Council at fault for failing to adhere to the statutory timescales, a delay in providing alternative provision for X, some poor communication, and failing to provide her with her appeal rights. In addition to the Council’s apology, it will make payment to Ms C to acknowledge the injustice this caused her and X.
-
East Sussex County Council (24 008 420)
Statement Upheld Charging 23-Jan-2025
Summary: The Council acknowledged it failed to properly deal with Mr X’s complaint about his wife’s care properly before a complaint was made to this office. It apologised and offered a satisfactory remedy. There is no outstanding injustice that requires intervention from this office.
-
Manchester City Council (24 005 672)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 23-Jan-2025
Summary: Miss X complains the council has failed to complete a reassessment of her son Y's, Education, Health and Care Plan and issue a new Education, Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales. Miss X says Y has missed provision due to his Education, Health and Care plan not meeting his needs. Miss X also says the Council failed to respond to her complaint within the timescale in its policy. Miss X says this has caused her and her family distress. We have found fault in the actions of the Council for failing to issue Y’s Education, Health and Care Plan within statutory timescales and for failing to respond to Miss X’s complaint in line with its policy. We recommend the Council issues an apology, pays Miss X a financial payment and completes service improvements.
-
Luton Borough Council (24 005 686)
Statement Upheld Charging 23-Jan-2025
Summary: Mrs X complains the Council delayed assessing Mrs Y’s financial contribution for care. The Council was at fault as its communication was poor and there was significant delay in progressing the matter. The Council has agreed our recommended remedy for the frustration and time and trouble caused to Mrs X.
-
Devon County Council (24 005 923)
Statement Not upheld Other 23-Jan-2025
Summary: We found no fault on the part of a Council, Trust and Integrated Care Board in terms of their handling of Miss X’s section 117 aftercare.
-
Devon Partnership NHS Trust (24 005 923a)
Statement Not upheld Mental health services 23-Jan-2025
Summary: We found no fault on the part of a Council, Trust and Integrated Care Board in terms of their handling of Miss X’s section 117 aftercare.
-
Statement Not upheld Mental health services 23-Jan-2025
Summary: We found no fault on the part of a Council, Trust and Integrated Care Board in terms of their handling of Miss X’s section 117 aftercare.
-
North Lincolnshire Council (24 005 359)
Statement Upheld Special educational needs 23-Jan-2025
Summary: Mrs X complained the Council delayed issuing her son, Y’s, Education, Health and Care (EHC) Plan and failed to provide alternative provision when he was unable to attend school between June 2023 and June 2024. The Council was at fault in delaying issuing Y’s EHC Plan and failing to consider if it should provide him alternative provision. The Council will apologise to Mrs X, pay her £3,150 to recognise the frustration and uncertainty caused to her and for the term of education and specialist provision Y did not receive. The Council will also remind staff of its duties to consider alternative provision and respond to complaints fully.
-
Northumberland County Council (24 005 520)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Council tax 23-Jan-2025
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council closing the complainant’s council tax account in error. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.
-
Staffordshire County Council (23 016 736)
Statement Upheld Disabled children 23-Jan-2025
Summary: The Council was at fault for reducing the social care support it offered to Miss X and her disabled son without warning. Before our involvement, it also accepted failings in how it carried out occupational therapy and carer’s assessments. It has agreed to provide Miss X with remedies for the injustice these matters caused her. However, it was not otherwise at fault for how it provided support to Miss X’s son, or for how it dealt with her application for adaptations to her home.